MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386276001 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3280533/v1

Sexual selection on a female copulatory device in an insect with nuptial gifts

2023· preprint· en· W4386276001 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica H. Browne, Darryl Gwynne

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInsectSexual selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyZoologyEcologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Male genitalia are rapidly evolving structures, often driven sexual selection to increase fertilization success. Although sexual selection on females can be strong in systems where males provide offspring care or feed their mates, sometimes resulting in the evolution of female ornamentation, there are no actual estimates of direct sexual selection on female genitalia. In a New Zealand ground weta, Hemiandrus pallitarsis (Orthoptera: Ensifera, Anostostomatidae), females possess a genitalic device (the accessory organ) that is necessary for successful copulation and the acquisition of glandular food-gifts from males. These nutritious gifts are known to result in sexual competition among females in other ensiferan species. In ground weta, the gifts are probably important in avoiding starvation during a months-long period when caring for (their lifetime production of) eggs and offspring. Here, we test the hypothesis that the accessory organ is a sexually selected device in H. pallitarsis by measuring the female Bateman gradient and directional sexual selection on the accessory organ. Using newly developed and characterized microsatellite loci, we analyze offspring and/or stored sperm to estimate female mating frequency for the first time in ground weta. As predicted, we found positive Bateman gradients for females, and some evidence of directional sexual selection on accessory organ length. Although organ length does not correlate well with female fecundity, it may increase mating success by indicating her condition and thus quality of her offspring care.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.348
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.039 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→