Access to Resources Shapes Sex Differences Between Caring Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In species where both parents cooperate to care for their joint offspring, one sex often provides more care than the other. The magnitude of such sex differences often varies both between and within species and may depend on environmental conditions, such as access to resources, predation risk and interspecific competition. Here we investigated the impact of one such environmental variable – access to resources for breeding – on the magnitude of sex differences in parental care in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides . This species breeds on the carcasses of small vertebrates, which are the sole food source for parents and offspring during breeding. We manipulated access to resources by providing pairs with mouse carcasses from a broad mass range (3.65–26.15 g). We then monitored subsequent effects on the duration and amount of care provided by males and females, male and female food consumption and weight change during breeding, and larval traits related to offspring performance. We found that males increased their duration of care as carcass mass increased, while females remained with the brood until it had completed its development irrespective of carcass mass. There were thus more pronounced sex differences in parental care when parents had access to fewer resources for breeding. Overall, our findings show that sex differences between caring parents vary depending on access to resources during breeding. The finding that males extended their duration of care on larger carcasses suggests that access to more resources leads to a shift toward more cooperation between caring parents.
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".