MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386999562 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-35651-3_7

Non-conceptive Sexual Behavior in Cetaceans: Comparison of Form and Function

2023· book-chapter· en· W4386999562 on OpenAlexaff
Jackson R. Ham, Malin K. Lilley, Heather M. Hill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Sexual behaviorPsychologySocial groomingRepertoireExtant taxonDevelopmental psychologyZoologySocial psychologyBiologyEcologyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Non-conceptive sexual behavior (NCSB) is phylogenetically widespread, having been documented in 35 of the 87 extant cetacean species, but function and form of NCSB have not been studied in comparative manner. Many cetacean species engage in NCSB across a wide variety of settings and contexts (e.g., play, sexual, affiliative). NCSB includes both social and non-social sexual behaviors, such as non-social masturbation on the environment or social same-sex thrusting toward a conspecific, but importantly, none of the behavior described as NCSB affords reproduction. While these two general categories encompass all sexual actions, the behaviors are diverse depending on species, social structure, and sex of the individual being observed. Social sexual behavior presumably has individual or social benefits. This chapter organizes what is known about NCSB in cetaceans by summarizing NCSB repertoires from peer-reviewed literature and discussing proposed functions (e.g., practice for reproduction, attracting opposite-sex mates, reducing the reproductive opportunities of same-sex conspecifics, reinforcing dominance relationships, alliance formation, reconciliation, and social tension reduction). Further, the form or behavioral repertoire, the sex of the individuals engaging in NCSB, the environment observed in, and whether NCSB was present or absent in general are noted from each of the articles reviewed. Overall, NCSB behavior observed across species shares similar elements (e.g., thrusting, lateral presentations) in both Mysticeti and Odontoceti. NCSB tends to be more prevalent among sexually immature compared to sexually mature individuals. Additionally, NCSB is more prevalent between male conspecifics compared to females when animals engage in same-sex NCSB. Interspecific NCSB has also been reported for a number of species. While most reports come from toothed whales, the limited observations of baleen whales have also found that many species engage in NCSB, making it likely that NCSB is included in the behavioral repertoire of most cetacean species. NCSB likely aids in forming and maintaining social relations and/or in the development of sexual repertoires in cetaceans, not unlike what has been proposed for primates. We hope this chapter sparks interest in comparative studies of NCSB and sheds light on the similarities of NCSB across 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→