MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399878284 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-64188-0

When population growth intensifies intergroup competition, female colobus monkeys free-ride less

2024· article· en· W4399878284 on OpenAlexafffund
T. Jean M. Arseneau‐Robar, Julie A. Teichroeb, Andrew J. J. MacIntosh, Tania L. Saj, Emily Glotfelty, Sara Lucci, Pascale Sicotte, Eva C. Wikberg

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of CalgaryThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersSweden-America FoundationAlberta Innovates - Technology FuturesAnimal Behavior SocietyAlberta InnovatesUniversity of CalgaryAmerican Society of PrimatologistsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLeakey FoundationWenner-Gren Foundation
KeywordsCompetition (biology)PopulationZoologyBiologyDemographyPopulation growthEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intergroup aggression often results in the production of public goods, such as a safe and stable social environment and a home range containing the resources required to survive and reproduce. We investigate temporal variation in intergroup aggression in a growing population of colobus monkeys (Colobus vellerosus) to ask a novel question: "Who stepped-up to produce these public goods when doing so became more difficult?". Both whole-group encounters and male incursions occurred more frequently as the population grew. Males and females were both more likely to participate in whole-group encounters when monopolizable food resources were available, indicating both sexes engaged in food defence. However, only females increasingly did so as the population grew, suggesting that it was females who increasingly produced the public good of home range defence as intergroup competition intensified. Females were also more active in male incursions at high population densities, suggesting they increasingly produced the public good of a safe and stable social environment. This is not to say that males were chronic free-riders when it came to maintaining public goods. Males consistently participated in the majority of intergroup interactions throughout the study period, indicating they may have lacked the capacity to invest more time and effort.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→