Sex differences in immunity are often observed, with males generally having a weaker immune system than females. However, recent data in a sex-role-reversed species in which females compete to mate with males suggest that sexually competitive females have a weaker immune response. These findings support the hypothesis that sexual dimorphism in immunity has evolved in response to sex-specific fitness returns of investment in traits such as parental investment and longevity, but the scarcity of data in sex-reversed species prevents us from drawing general conclusions. Using an insect species in which males make a large but variable parental investment in their offspring, we use two indicators of immunocompetence to test the hypothesis that sex-biased immunity is determined by differences in parental investment. We found that when the value of paternal investment was experimentally increased, male immune investment became relatively greater than that of females. Thus, in this system, in which the direction of sexual competition is plastic, the direction of sex-biased immunity is also plastic and appears to track relative parental investment.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2015.
All research outputs
#17,578,128
of 27,367,745 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#10,450
of 11,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,990
of 252,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#119
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,367,745 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,834 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 252,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
