Lifetime reproductive success of northern elephant seals (<i>Mirounga angustirostris</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lifetime reproductive success of individuals in a natural population provides an estimate of Darwinian fitness. We calculated lifetime reproductive success in a colony of female northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris (Gill, 1866)) by monitoring annual breeding throughout life of 7735 female weanlings marked individually at Año Nuevo, California, USA, from 1963 to 2005. Great variation in lifetime reproductive success was evident in three aspects of life history: (1) 75% of the females died before reaching breeding age and produced no pups; (2) nearly half of the survivors bred for only a few years before dying, and young females had low weaning success; (3) less than 1% of the females in the sample were exceptionally successful producing up to 20 pups in life. Many females that bred early, while still growing, had decreased lifespan, low weaning success, and lower lifetime reproductive success than females that postponed first breeding. Exceptional reproductive success was associated with giving birth annually, living long (up to age 23), and weaning large pups that were more likely to survive and breed. We conclude that there is strong selection for increased lifespan and multiparous supermoms that contribute significantly to pup production in the next generation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".