Shed antlers as a larval environment: antler quality and adult performance of wild <i>Protopiophila litigata</i> (Diptera: Piophilidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The developmental environment can have an especially large impact on life history plasticity in animals, influencing body size, reproductive success, and longevity. This is because developmental processes interact with environmental factors to determine phenotypes such as body size, sexual investment, and metabolic rate, which in turn can influence longevity and senescence. We investigated how natural differences in the larval environment (discarded moose antlers) influenced development time, survival, and mating success of wild male antler flies, Protopiophila litigata Bonduriansky (Diptera: Piophilidae). Antlers become depleted of resources from year to year, as multiple generations of larvae feed within them. We collected larvae that grew inside nine different shed moose antlers, and we individually tracked them in the field as adults. Moose antlers that were more attractive to adult P. litigata also supported a greater number of larvae, suggesting they are of higher quality. Flies that developed in more attractive antlers completed metamorphosis more quickly but did not differ in body size, longevity, or lifetime mating success. This suggests that the observed differences in larval density may, in part, balance the variation in resource availability among antlers. Regardless of natal antler, large male P. litigata tended to live longer and have higher mating success, as found in previous studies of this 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".