Back

It is complicated: how sex, family, and season affect growth in a sexually size-dimorphic spider

Prezelj, T.; Debes, P. V.; Golobinek, R.; Kralj-Fiser, S.

2025-12-06 zoology
10.64898/2025.12.04.692355 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Female-biased sexual size dimorphism (SSD), where females are larger than males, is widespread. While ultimate explanations for SSD are well established, the proximate developmental mechanisms remain poorly understood. Studying sex-specific growth trajectories to identify common vs. sex-specific growth periods is therefore key to uncovering when and how SSD emerges. Theory predicts that female-biased SSD may arise if females hatch larger, grow more rapidly, grow longer, or combine these pathways. We studied sex-specific growth trajectories in the African hermit spider, Nephilingis cruentata, where adult females are on average 75-times heavier and take 2.3-times longer until adulthood than males. We tracked growth trajectories of carapace width for 916 individuals. After initial growth trajectories common to both sexes, trajectories diverged after [~]80 days, coinciding with the onset of the male subadult stage. At this point, male growth decelerated and terminated at sexual maturity, whereas female growth accelerated until their subadult stage at [~]200 days. Thereafter, female growth rate also decelerated and eventually terminated at sexual maturity. Thus, females attain their larger size through both an extended growth period and a more rapid growth rate, which initiates in mid-development. Whereas we detected seasonal effects on growth that were similar in both sexes, family effects showed strong sex-specific signatures. Our results pinpoint a key developmental window in which male and female growth trajectories begin to diverge, providing a clear target for detailed investigation of the mechanisms underlying SSD. At the same time, the complexity of these patterns will likely hinder mechanistic studies of SSD development.

Published in Integrative Zoology · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.