MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035911138 · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyaa058

Breeding patterns of female prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) displaying alternative reproductive tactics

2020· article· en· W3035911138 on OpenAlexaff
James B. Lichter, Connor T. Lambert, Nancy G. Solomon, Brian Keane

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthSigma XiaAmerican Society of MammalogistsUniversity of Miami
KeywordsPrairie voleMicrotusBiologyOffspringNest (protein structural motif)MatingPopulationDemographyReproductive successSeasonal breederZoologyAnimal sexual behaviourMating systemHouse micePregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

), most adults are territorial, residing at a single nest site either as male-female pairs or as solitary individuals. However, some adults adopt nonterritorial, wandering tactics. During two field seasons monitoring prairie vole populations maintained in seminatural enclosures, we found evidence that females exhibiting different ARTs bred differentially with resident and wandering males. Females residing at a nest with a male bred significantly more often with a paired resident male, primarily their social partner, and significantly less often with male wanderers compared to single resident females or wandering females. These patterns were not due to chance, because paired resident females produced offspring with paired resident males significantly more than expected based on the relative abundance of these males in the population, whereas single resident females produced offspring with male wanderers significantly more than expected based on the proportion of male wanderers in the population. We did not find any evidence that multiple paternity was greater in the litters of single resident females and wanderer females even though these females lacked a male social partner to limit mating access by multiple males. This suggests that mate guarding by a female's male social partner was not the primary determinant of multiple paternity in the litters of females exhibiting different reproductive tactics. However, male ART did affect the likelihood of multiple paternity. Females that produced offspring with single resident or wanderer males had an increased likelihood of multiple paternity relative to females producing offspring with paired resident males. The results of this study show that female and male ARTs can affect breeding patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207