Measuring Deer Antler Volume

[DaveC426913]

I doubt that dominance is decided by symmetry, or minor imperfections.
Nutrition decides antler mass or volume, and so in a head-to-head conflict, the best fed buck, with the best healthy genetics will dominate.

Right. So it is apparent that the fitness/robustness of the animal and the anesthetic preference of the judges are not in alignment.

 

[renormalize]

Right. So it is apparent that the fitness/robustness of the animal and the anesthetic preference of the judges are not in alignment.

But whenever the judges aren't unconscious they likely have aesthetic preferences.

 

[JT Smith]

Right. So it is apparent that the fitness/robustness of the animal and the anesthetic [sic] preference of the judges are not in alignment.

I don't think it is well understood what the preferences of female white-tailed deer are exactly. I found one paper where they studied the behavior of female deer toward males of different size, age, and antler size, with the other variables controlled (they actually fitted the males with a means of changing antlers). They found that the size or age of the animal didn't matter, only the antler size. But they only compared large antlers versus small ones so it isn't possible from this study to say whether the females had an aesthetic appreciation for a nice set of antlers versus simply big ones, never mind if volume mattered instead of spread or height.

I think the notion of trying to intuit or deduce the factors that affect sexual attraction of female deer in order to score antlers is amusing. Why not just measure their size objectively in some agreed upon fashion?

 

[sophiecentaur]

In the B&C system, asymmetry is punished, as the "Total of Lengths of Abnormal Points" is subtracted from the score. A volume measurement would not distinguish between good and evil without additional complexity.

Analysis of (standard) photos could give degree of symmetry for the two sides and relative brightness density over the silhouette etc. etc. would be easily standardised for comparison and awarding marks. Computers are excellent at this sort of thing. Looks like a great job for AI. In fact, you could just leave it to AI to find the best parameters of photos to agree with years of humans awarding marks and take it from there. Losers would complain, winners would feel good about the system.
Not as much fun though, for enthusiasts.

If we just measure volume and assume a common density,

But that's just the equivalent of mass, if you assume uniform density. Only meeds a spring balance; simples.

 

[DaveC426913]

Looks like a great job for AI. In fact, you could just leave it to AI to find the best parameters of photos to agree with years of humans awarding marks and take it from there.

That is both cool and alarming in the same breath.

 

[erobz]

I don't think it is well understood what the preferences of female white-tailed deer are exactly. I found one paper where they studied the behavior of female deer toward males of different size, age, and antler size, with the other variables controlled (they actually fitted the males with a means of changing antlers). They found that the size or age of the animal didn't matter, only the antler size. But they only compared large antlers versus small ones so it isn't possible from this study to say whether the females had an aesthetic appreciation for a nice set of antlers versus simply big ones, never mind if volume mattered instead of spread or height.

I think the notion of trying to intuit or deduce the factors that affect sexual attraction of female deer in order to score antlers is amusing. Why not just measure their size objectively in some agreed upon fashion?

I never assumed the females had a preference. As far as I can tell it is the competition of males that makes the losers fearful of approaching receptive females while the champion is around. If a female in heat is left in unattended, smaller (defeated) competitors will also breed them while the does are receptive.