Table 1 Summary of meta-analyses testing status-related differences in parasitism in male and female vertebrates. Models presented in this table represent the best-supported models based on k-fold cross validation. Variance estimates are reported as standard deviations of the random effects.

From: Social status and parasitism in male and female vertebrates: a meta-analysis

type of meta-analysisA

sample size (analyses)

random effects included

kfoldIC

standard difference in means

95% CI lower limit

95% CI upper limit

p B

variance estimate (standard deviation)

total heterogeneity (I2) with credible intervals

higher in dominant or subordinate

Egger’s test

citations

study

species

phylogeny

(p-value)

Male Studies

   all male studies

66

study only

152.204

0.511

0.130

0.974

0.005

0.875

—

—

99.19 (98.46–99.77)

dominant

<0.001

24,25,26,33,38,43,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100

    males in despotic hierarchies

59

study and species

140.225

0.493

0.013

1.001

0.023

0.677

0.600

—

99.40 (98.83–99.82)

dominant

<0.001

24,25,26,33,38,43,81,82,83,84,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100

   males in egalitarian hierarchies

6

NAC

12.112

0.170

−0.532

0.902

0.300

NAC

NAC

NAC

24.06 (0.01–78.97)

neither

0.304

85

   males in polygynandrous mating systems

29

study only

79.085

0.943

0.348

1.671

0.001

0.938

—

—

78.29 (59.92–95.22)

dominant

0.002

24,25,38,81,82,84,85,88,90,91,92,93,94,96,100

   males in cooperative breeding mating systems

18

study only

29.307

0.390

−1.573

2.344

0.161

1.098

—

—

71.27 (27.28–99.97)

neither

<0.001

26,43,89

   males in polygynous mating systems

15

study only

41.34

−0.168

−1.272

1.114

0.322

1.207

—

—

94.42 (83.25–99.93)

neither

0.242

33,83,87,95,98,99,100

   males in monogamous mating systems

4

study only

2.787

0.229

−6.677

6.209

0.355

3.111

—

—

84.91 (28.92–99.99)

neither

0.496

86,97

   males exposed to environmentally- and contact-transmitted parasites

53

study only

122.344

0.704

0.238

1.276

0.002

0.960

—

—

99.44 (98.91–99.85)

dominant

<0.001

24,25,26,38,81,82,83,84,85,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,100

   males exposed to parasites transmitted by flying-vectors

6

study and species

15.507

−0.104

−4.244

3.914

0.469

2.018

2.046

—

95.29 (83.32–99.99)

neither

0.634

33,43,86,98

Female Studies

   all female studies

62

study only

114.020

0.322

−0.059

0.737

0.044

0.611

—

—

98.33 (96.56–99.68)

dominant

0.118

24,26,81,87,89,90,94,101,102,103,104,105,106

   females in despotic nepotistic hierarchies

44

study, species, phylogeny

92.562

0.168

−2.127

2.377

0.365

0.616

0.355

1.070

92.16 (78.68–99.88)

neither

0.050

24,81,87,88,90,92,94,97,101,102,103,104,105

   females in despotic age-based hierarchies

18

study

23.405

0.324

−2.549

3.371

0.309

—

—

—

90.16 (66.83–99.99)

neither

0.170

26,89,106

   females in polygynandrous mating systems

29

study and species

62.579

0.457

−0.571

1.447

0.121

0.755

0.585

—

74.52 (46.91–98.92)

neither

0.199

24,81,90,94,102,103,104,105

   females in cooperative breeding mating systems

17

study

19.646

0.547

−5.953

6.788

0.286

3.460

—

—

92.40 (67.09–99.99)

neither

0.044

26,89

   females in polygynous mating systems

16

study

32.001

−0.266

−1.488

0.882

0.166

0.646

—

—

74.78 (34.55–99.99)

neither

0.040

87,101,106

   females exposed to environmentally- and contact-transmitted parasites

61

study

108.234

0.371

−0.006

0.808

0.027

0.605

—

—

98.30 (96.41–99.67)

dominant

0.120

24,26,81,87,89,90,94,101,102,103,104,105

  1. AIn all of the above models, study setting (wild non-provisioned, wild provisioned, captive) did not significantly improve model fit and was removed from all final models. BThe p-values generated by the brms package36 are 1-tailed, while the credible intervals are 2-tailed CNA = not applicable (All effect sizes for egalitarian hierarchies were from the same study and species).