MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948625730 · doi:10.5061/dryad.s1rn8pkbh

Sexual selection on a female copulatory device in an insect with nuptial gifts

2023· dataset· en· W6948625730 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual selectionMatingOffspringSperm competitionFemale sperm storageMating systemSelection (genetic algorithm)Paternal care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Male genitalia are rapidly evolving structures, often driven by sexual selection to increase fertilization success. Although sexual selection on females can be strong in systems where males provide offspring care or feed their mates, sometimes resulting in the evolution of female ornamentation, there are no actual estimates of direct sexual selection on female genitalia. In a New Zealand ground weta, Hemiandrus pallitarsis (Orthoptera: Ensifera, Anostostomatidae), females possess a genitalic device (the accessory organ) that is necessary for successful copulation and the acquisition of glandular food-gifts from males. These nutritious gifts are known to result in sexual competition among females in other ensiferan species. In ground weta, the gifts are probably important in avoiding starvation during a months-long period when caring for (their lifetime production of) eggs and offspring. Here, we test the hypothesis that the accessory organ is a sexually selected device in H. pallitarsis by measuring the female Bateman gradient, Jones index, and directional sexual selection on the accessory organ. Using newly developed and characterized microsatellite loci, we analyze offspring and/or stored sperm to estimate female mating frequency for the first time in ground weta. As predicted, we found both a positive Bateman gradient and Jones index for females, and evidence of directional sexual selection on accessory organ length. Although organ length does not correlate well with female fecundity, it may increase mating success by indicating her condition and thus quality of her offspring care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.033

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADFrench-language works237,207