Sexual selection in capelin: endurance rivalry insights from semen quality and regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Male-biased adult sexual size dimorphism is often the result of intra-sexual selection driven by male-male competition. Capelin ( Mallotus villosus ) exhibit male-biased sexual size dimorphism but lack contest competition or clear scramble competition, and female mate choice, if present, is unrelated to male size. Consequently, it is hypothesized that adult sexual size dimorphism in capelin is due to a mating system that favours larger males with greater energy reserves, allowing them to compete for prolonged access to mating opportunities through endurance rivalry. To enable this, males need a continual supply of semen throughout the spawning season. However, they have unusually small testes and are predicted to deplete stored semen rapidly. Furthermore, their unique sperm physiology (i.e. the only known externally fertilizing vertebrate to release pre-activated semen) may constrain their ability to regenerate it. We found that the majority of capelin sampled on beaches had adequate semen, but towards the end of the spawning season, some fish had none. Capelin held in laboratory tanks could regenerate semen within two days, maintaining their ability to seize continual mating opportunities. These results support the endurance rivalry 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".