Communal egg‐laying behaviour and the consequences of egg aggregation in the brown anole (<i>Anolis sagrei</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Communal nesting is a behaviour that involves multiple females laying eggs in the same nest or nesting site. This behaviour may be a consequence of a shortage of preferable nest sites (constraint hypothesis) or an adaptation generated by fitness benefits associated with egg aggregation (adaptive hypothesis). Experimental tests of these hypotheses require information about maternal nest site choice and its fitness consequences. To address these, we studied a lizard (brown anole; Anolis sagrei ) that produces single‐egg clutches, but often aggregates eggs in nest sites. In a lab study, females were given the option of nesting in (a) soil previously used as nest substrate vs. fresh soil and (b) soil with eggshells vs. without eggshells. We also experimentally examined the effects of egg aggregation by incubating eggs singly, in groups of four, and in groups of nine. We recorded egg surface temperature, water uptake, and hatchling morphology. Females were more likely to nest in pots with used soil and with eggshells than in pots with fresh soil or without eggshells. We observed no effects of egg aggregation on egg survival, egg temperature, or most measures of hatchling morphology. However, singly‐incubated eggs absorbed more water than eggs incubated in the four and nine egg aggregations and this resulted in offspring with greater body condition (i.e. heavier for their length) at hatching. The behavioural experiment demonstrates that females actively choose nest sites that have been used previously (as expected under the adaptive hypothesis), but the egg‐aggregation experiment shows no benefits to offspring based on the variables measured. Thus, results of the behaviour study support the adaptive hypothesis; however, results from our egg‐incubation study do not. Likely, the adaptive and constraint hypotheses are not mutually exclusive, and a diversity of factors influence the evolution of communal nesting behaviour.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".