Costs of male infanticide for female capuchins: When does an adaptive male reproductive strategy become costly for females and detrimental to population viability?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Infanticide in white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus imitator) typically occurs in association with alpha male replacements (AMRs). Although infanticide is likely adaptive for males, it imposes costs on females that are difficult to quantify without long-term demographic data. Here we investigate effects of AMRs and infanticide on female reproductive success and how these costs affect capuchin groups. We investigate (1) effects of AMR frequency on the production of surviving infants; (2) energetic and (3) temporal "opportunity costs" of infant loss; and (4) how AMR frequency impacts capuchin group sizes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We censused six groups (7-33 years/group, 74 adult females). We modeled surviving infant production in relation to AMR. We estimated a female's energy requirements for lost infants and the temporal cost relative to the median reproductive window. We simulated how varying AMR rates would affect future capuchin group sizes. RESULTS: Females exposed to more frequent AMR tended to produce fewer surviving offspring. We estimate the average lost infant requires approximately 33% additional energy intake for its mother and represents 10% of the average reproductive opportunity window available to females. Simulated populations remain viable at the observed rate of AMR occurrence but decrease in size at even slightly higher rates. DISCUSSION: While infanticide is adaptive for males, for females it affects lifetime reproductive success and imposes energetic and opportunity costs. Although capuchin populations have evolved with AMRs and infanticide, small increases in AMR frequency may lead to population decline/extinction. Infanticide likely plays a large role in population maintenance for capuchins.
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) | 0.001 | 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".