Male Hemolymph Loss During Nuptial Feeding as a Proximate Mechanisim Underlying the Virgin-Male Mating Advantage in Sagebrush Crickets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male sagebrush crickets, Cyphoderris strepitans, offer an unusual nuptial food gift to females during mating: females chew on the ends of the males' fleshy hind wings and ingest hemolymph seeping from the wounds they inflict. Previous studies have shown that once a male had mated, his probability of obtaining an additional copulation is reduced relative to that of a virgin male seeking to secure his first mating, a pattern known as the virginmale mating advantage. One hypothesis to account for the virgin-male mating advantage is that nonvirgin males, having lost a substantial portion of their energy reserves at mating, may be unable to sustain the costly acoustical signaling activity required for the passive attraction of additional females. If the future mating prospects of non-virgin males are diminished because of sexual fatigue, this could stem either from the resources required to manufacture a new spermatophore or through the energy needed to replenish haemolymph lost through female wingfeeding. To distinguish between these two alternatives, we experimentally depleted virgin males of varying amounts haemolymph (0, 5 and 10 ul) in a way that mimicked hemolymph loss of non-virgin males, without the attendant costs of spermatophore production. After they had been treated, males were released in the field and recaptured over the course of the breeding season to monitor their mating success. Control males mated significantly sooner than did males depleted of 5 or 10 ul of hemolymph. We conclude, therefore, that the depletion of hemolymph that occurs through female wing feeding is sufficient by itself to diminish a non-virgin male's ability to secure another mating, acting as a brake on the operation of sexual selection in 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".