Evolutionary Ecology of Fixed Alternative Male Mating Strategies in the Ruff (<em>Calidris pugnax</em>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A few empirical examples document fixed alternative male mating strategies in animals. Here we focus on the polymorphism of male mating strategies in the ruff (Calidris pugnax, Aves Charadriiformes). In ruffs, three fixed alternative male mating strategies coexist and are signaled by extreme plumage polymorphism. We first present relevant data on the biology of the species. Then we review the available knowledge of the behavioral ecology of ruffs during the breeding season and we detail the characteristics of each of the three known fixed male mating strategies. We next turn to the exceptional quality results accumulated on both the structural and functional genomics of the ruff over the past few years. We show how much these genomic data can shed a new, mechanistic light on the evolution and maintenance of the three fixed alternative male mating strategies. We then look if there are sufficient indication to support frequency-dependent selection as key mechanism in maintaining these three strategies. Specifically, we search for evidences of equal fitness among individuals using each of the three strategies. Finally, we propose three lines of research avenues that will help to understand the eco-evolutionary dynamics of phenotypic differences within natural populations of this iconic model species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".