Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of polyandry has received increasing scientific attention with an emphasis on the fitness benefits and costs that females derive from mating with multiple males. There are still gaps in our understanding of how polyandry affects female fitness, however, as many previous studies compared the fitness outcomes of a single mating vs. 2 or 3 matings and did not separate the consequences of multiple mating from the costs of sexual harassment. We, therefore, conducted controlled mating trials with female fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) that could mate at either low (every 8 days), medium (every 4 days), or high (every other day) rates while controlling for exposure to harassment from males. We found that female lifetime fitness was highest under the high mating-rate followed by the medium mating-rate conditions. Moreover, we did not detect reductions in lifespan as a consequence of higher rates of polyandry. Our results demonstrate that even at realistically high rates, polyandry can lead to net fitness benefits for females, which can have major implications for sexual selection. Specifically, we discuss the significance of our findings as they relate to competition and the evolution of secondary sex characteristics in females, and sperm competition among males.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".