MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4240020539 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-11084

Influence of male mating history on female mate choice in the Trinidadian guppy

2015· dissertation· en· W4240020539 on OpenAlexafffund
Valentina Scarponi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAnimal Behavior Society
KeywordsGuppySpermMate choiceMatingSperm competitionBiologySexual selectionFertilityFemale sperm storageMating preferencesZoologyReproductionPoeciliaEcologyDemographyGeneticsPopulationFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phenotype-linked fertility hypothesis proposes that sexual selection should favour females who can accurately assess the fertilization potential of available males and preferentially avoid mating with males who may be sperm depleted so as to minimize the costs associated with reproduction.I investigated experimentally whether females of the Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata) are able to assess male functional fertility using a wide range of sensory cues and choose to avoid mating with males who may be sperm limited.On average, female guppies avoided males that were apparently previously mated or actually sperm depleted, while exhibiting a significant preference for the other non-sperm depleted male.Both visual and chemical cues from males appear to reveal their potential functional fertility and such cues were used by females to discriminate between sperm depleted and non-sperm depleted males.My novel results are important as they support the above stated hypothesis.

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)0.001
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→