[Babase] POTENTIAL_DADS view can be tested-ish
Jeanne Altmann
altj at Princeton.EDU
Tue Oct 19 09:46:13 EDT 2010
Thanks for the alert Susan; as you suspected, I have just been filing.
Thanks for the understandable question Niki. The simple answer for now
is that D-1 thru D-5 is still our best bet on high paternity probability
days--based on lab studies and our successful use in our studies. That
doesn't mean that it's what we'll use forever or for all purposes (and
if we made some slight modification, it would probably be to add -6
rather than D day), but I think this is what we want to stay with now
unless Susan thinks otherwise. I can fill you in more when I'm back.
Susan, anything to add or any changes you recommend on this?
jeanne
-----Original Message-----
From: babase-bounces at eeblistserv.princeton.edu
[mailto:babase-bounces at eeblistserv.princeton.edu] On Behalf Of Susan
Alberts
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 12:49 PM
To: The Baboon Database Project
Subject: Re: [Babase] POTENTIAL_DADS view can be tested-ish
> Niki writes:
> .......
> But I am a little confused as to why we don't want to count the
> zdate as a
> potential dad day. There are definitely consortships that occur on
> the D
> day and that is the day we are saying that the pregnancy begins so
> in theory
> I would think mounts occurring on the zdate could lead to conception
> (especially if deturg is in the afternoon), no? Though I guess
> Courtney's
> data indicates that deturg really occurs before the observers notice
> it.
> But if conception never occurs on the ddate, why do we call the
> zdate on
> that day? Just trying to sort out the logic.
OK, this is a good point.
Here are some thoughts. One issue is, what do we do in order to be
consistent with all our past work? The answer to that is, we do not
include the Z date as a potential dad day. In the past, we have always
restricted our analyses to days D- 1 through D- 5.
Another issue is, what is biologically most relevant? The laboratory
data suggest that there is still a small chance of conception after
deturgescence begins, it appears to be 10% or less. However, 10% is
not nothing, and so perhaps we should include it.
Against this are (1) the fact that a male who arrived on D-Day has a
vanishingly small chance of conceiving an infant with a female on that
day, because if there are any males around her my experience suggests
that they will be the males she has already been consorting with, and
(2) the males that are usually with her on D-Day are the mails that
were with her on the previous days.
So, taking all this into consideration, my inclination is to remain
consistent with what we have done in the past and not to consider the
zdate. However, I would like to hear from Jeanne on this, and I would
also like to ask Courtney who has just spent a year and a half
watching consortships.
Susan
------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Alberts, Professor of Biology, Duke University, Box 90338,
Durham NC 27708. Phone 919-660-7272, FAX 919-660-7293
_______________________________________________
Babase mailing list
Babase at www.eco.princeton.edu
http://www.eco.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/babase
More information about the Babase
mailing list