Conflict and cooperation in male–male partnerships alter paternal care behavior in the ocellated wrasse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Parental care is a critical determinant of offspring fitness. Female presence and male competition affect paternal care, but male–male cooperation during mating may also be an important, yet underappreciated, driver of paternal care. In many systems, males work together to court females or defend territories against male competitors. This male–male cooperation can alter actual or perceived paternity of the parenting male and could, therefore, influence how males invest in care during the postmating period. Here, we measured how reproductive and social dynamics between nesting and satellite males during mating correlate with nesting male paternal care in the ocellated wrasse (Symphodus ocellatus). Although paternal care (fanning rates) was repeatable across days within the same nesting cycle, it was not repeatable across different nesting cycles, suggesting that males plastically alter care in response to the environment. Nesting males provided care for fewer days at nests with the most unstable relationship between the nesting and satellite male: nests with low satellite cooperation and high male–male conflict where the satellite eventually left or was evicted from the nest. Nesting males also parented more intensively, but for fewer days in the warmer year, suggesting that males may adjust care in response to temperature. Collectively, our results suggest that there is no fixed male trait that females can use to predict paternal care behavior. Instead, females may use male–male interactions as a proxy for the quality of care her offspring will receive, suggesting that sexual selection may favor the co-evolution of paternal care with male–male cooperation.
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".