Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 375

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On sexual dimorphism in immune function

Open access
Nunn, Charles L, Lindenfors, Patrik, Pursall, E. Rhiannon, Rolff, Jens·2009·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Sexual dimorphism in immune function is a common pattern in vertebrates and also in a number of invertebrates. Most often, females are more ‘immunocompetent’ than males. The underlying causes are explained by either the role of immunosuppressive substances, such as testosterone, or by fundamental differences in male and female life histories. Here, we investigate some of the main predictions of the immunocompetence handicap hypothesis (ICHH) in a comparative framework using mammals. We focus specifically on the prediction that measures of sexual competition across species explain the observed patterns of variation in sex-specific immunocompetence within species. Our results are not consistent with the ICHH, but we do find that female mammals tend to have higher white blood cell counts (WBC), with some further associations between cell counts and longevity in females. We also document positive covariance between sexual dimorphism in immunity, as measured by a subset of WBC, and dimorphism in the duration of effective breeding. This is consistent with the application of ‘Bateman's principle’ to immunity, with females maximizing fitness by lengthening lifespan through greater investment in immune defences. Moreover, we present a meta-analysis of insect immunity, as the lack of testosterone in insects provides a means to investigate Bateman's principle for immunity independently of the ICHH. Here, we also find a systematic female bias in the expression of one of the two components of insect immune function that we investigated (phenoloxidase). From these analyses, we conclude that the mechanistic explanations of the ICHH lack empirical support. Instead, fitness-related differences between the sexes are potentially sufficient to explain many natural patterns in immunocompetence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2008.0148

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Cited by

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Nunn, C. L., Lindenfors, P., Pursall, E. R., & Rolff, J.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2008-10-16
Volume
364
Issue
1513
Pages
61-69
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2121050439
Cited by
375
References
56
FWCI
14.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On sexual dimorphism in immune function. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2008.0148
The paper
Nunn, C. L., Lindenfors, P., Pursall, E. R., & Rolff, J. (2009). On sexual dimorphism in immune function. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0148

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.