Demographics of injuries indicate sexual coercion in a population of Painted Turtles (<i>Chrysemys</i> <i>picta</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexually coercive reproductive tactics are widespread among animals. Males may employ specialized structures to harass, intimidate, or physically harm females to force copulation, and injuries to the head and neck are reported in taxa with sexually coercive mating systems. The mating tactics of Painted Turtles (Chrysemys picta (Schneider, 1783)) are typically described as involving male courtship and female choice. In contrast, female Painted Turtles in our study population display injuries on the head and neck indicative of bite wounds inflicted by sexually dimorphic tomiodonts and weaponized shell morphology of males during reproductive interactions. Using a 24-year data set, we demonstrate population-level trends in soft tissue wounds inflicted by conspecifics. Adult females experienced more wounding than adult males or juveniles, and larger females had a greater probability of wounding than smaller females. Wounding was concentrated on the dorsal head and neck of females, consistent with expectation of sexual coercion. Furthermore, elevated rates of fresh wounding occurred during late summer, concurrent with the breeding period. By assessing wound demographics, we provide indirect evidence that the tomiodonts and shell of male Painted Turtles inflict injury and function as sexual weapons. These findings shed new light on our understanding of mating system complexity in an often-overlooked and difficult-to-observe taxonomic group.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".