Evaluating sex differences in behaviour and glucocorticoids of rodents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In rodents, different selective pressures influence behavioural, physiological and life-history strategies between sexes. Anisogamy and the reproductive cost hypothesis suggests that differences in gamete size and trade-offs in reproduction are driving mechanisms of sex-specific reproductive strategy. However, relationships between behaviour and energetic investment in income-breeding rodents are not fully explored. We investigated behavioural and physiological traits in two rodent species from Algonquin Provincial Park, Canada using two standardized behavioural assays and faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGMs) as a proxy for movement and energetic stress. We hypothesized that sex differences in reproductive investment throughout a single breeding season would influence behavioural and physiological traits. We predicted that males would be more explorative and less docile than females due to increased risks associated with mate acquisition. We also predicted that FGMs would be greater in females compared to males due to the increased investment in the development and care of young. In contrast to our hypothesis, we observed some differences in behaviour between sexes in the opposite direction. Male deer mice ( Peromyscus maniculatus ) were more docile (mean difference = 0.312, 95% CI = [−0.24; 0.87], ), and male red-backed voles ( Clethrionomys gapperi ) were less explorative (mean difference =-73.8 s, 95% CI = [−127.5; −19.029], ) than female counterparts. There was also a high degree of within-individual variation in FGMs in both species. Between-individual variation was only observed in red-backed voles (26.7%), however neither species had a significant relationship between sex and FGMs. Our findings reveal some relationships between behaviour and physiology in income-breeding rodents.
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".