Does primiparity affect the efficiency of converting energy to offspring production in the guinea-pig?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In small mammals the reproductive performance of first-time breeders is of great relevance to fitness. However, young primiparous mothers reproduce generally less successfully than multiparous ones. One constraining factor may be inefficiency of novice breeders in converting energy to offspring production. To test this hypothesis I investigated the energy cost of gestation and lactation in the guinea-pig (Cavia porcellus). I compared mothers' offspring production (growth of pups), body mass, and energy intake, as well as the solid-food intake of their pups (during lactation) and energy expenditure (resting oxygen consumption) between young primiparous, old primiparous, second-litter multiparous, and third-litter multiparous females. Young primiparous females showed significantly lower offspring production than multiparous females. For older primiparous females the level was intermediate. Both young and older primiparous females showed a lower efficiency of converting energy to offspring production than their multiparous conspecifics. Parity affected lactation most strongly. Part of the inefficiency of primiparous guinea-pig mothers can be explained by the lower contribution to the energy budget made by their offspring from independent consumption of solid food.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".