MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245164154 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arab131

Female preference for color-enhanced males: a test of the sensory bias model in medaka, a drab fish

2021· article· en· W4245164154 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin M.B. Downer-Bartholomew, F. Helen Rodd

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyMate choiceMating preferencesSexual selectionMatingContext (archaeology)ZoologyPreferenceAssortative matingColored

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sexual selection research has long focused on the evolution of female mate preferences. Most of the models that have been developed posit that mate preferences evolve in a mating context. In contrast, the sensory bias model proposes that mate choice preferences arise in a non-mating context, as a by-product of natural selection acting on a female’s perceptual system. Recent research has shown that many species of fishes, from across a large clade including poeciliids, goodeids, and medaka, have a bias for long wavelength (LW) colors (yellow, orange, red) in a non-mating context. Even species that do not have LW-colored ornaments, apparently because they have been lost secondarily, retain this latent bias for LW colors. Here, we predicted that female Oryzias latipes (Japanese medaka), a drab species with a latent preference for LW colors, would show a mate choice preference for males with an artificial secondary sexual trait—a colored stripe added to their flank. We confirmed that females were more responsive to red and orange objects in a non-mating context than to other colors. We also showed that females were less resistant towards males with an LW-colored stripe than to those enhanced with a non-LW stripe and that, for many females, responses towards specific LW colors were consistent across these non-mating and mating contexts. Therefore, our results provide support for the sensory bias model by providing a link between a sensory bias in a non-mating context and a mate choice preference in a drab species like medaka.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207