Male–male behavioral interactions drive social-dominance-mediated differences in ejaculate traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Higher social status is expected to result in fitness benefits as it secures access to potential mates. In promiscuous species, male reproductive success is also determined by an individual’s ability to compete for fertilization after mating by producing high-quality ejaculates. However, the complex relationship between a male’s investment in social status and ejaculates remains unclear. Here, we examine how male social status influences ejaculate quality under a range of social contexts in the pygmy halfbeak Dermogenys collettei, a small, group-living, internally fertilizing freshwater fish. We show that male social status influences ejaculate traits, both in the presence and absence of females. Dominant males produced faster swimming and more viable sperm, two key determinants of ejaculate quality, but only under conditions with frequent male–male behavioral interactions. When male–male interactions were experimentally reduced through the addition of a refuge, differences in ejaculate traits of dominant and subordinate males disappeared. Furthermore, dominant males were in a better condition, growing faster, and possessing larger livers, highlighting a possible condition dependence of competitive traits. Contrary to expectations, female presence or absence did not affect sperm swimming speed or testes mass. Together, these results suggest a positive relationship between social status and ejaculate quality in halfbeaks and highlight that the strength of behavioral interactions between males is a key driver of social-status-dependent differences in ejaculate traits.
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) | 0.004 | 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".