Sexual dimorphism in resource acquisition and deployment: both size and timing matter.

Background and Aims The males and females of many dioecious plant species differ from one another in important life-history traits, such as their size. If male and female reproductive functions draw on different resources, for example, one should expect males and females to display different allocation strategies as they grow. Importantly, these strategies may differ not only between the two sexes, but also between plants of different age and therefore size. Results are presented from an experiment that asks whether males and females of Mercurialis annua, an annual plant with indeterminate growth, differ over time in their allocation of two potentially limiting resources (carbon and nitrogen) to vegetative (below-and above-ground) and reproductive tissues.Methods Comparisons were made of the temporal patterns of biomass allocation to shoots, roots and reproduction and the nitrogen content in the leaves between the sexes of M. annua by harvesting plants of each sex after growth over different periods of time.Key Results and Conclusions Males and females differed in their temporal patterns of allocation. Males allocated more to reproduction than females at early stages, but this trend was reversed at later stages. Importantly, males allocated proportionally more of their biomass towards roots at later stages, but the roots of females were larger in absolute terms. The study points to the important role played by both the timing of resource deployment and the relative versus absolute sizes of the sinks and sources in sexual dimorphism of an annual plant.

The skill paradox: Explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

Using a social identity theory approach, we theorized that recruiters might be particularly biased against skilled immigrant applicants. We refer to this phenomenon as a skill paradox, according to which immigrants are more likely to be targets of employment discrimination the more skilled they are. Furthermore, building on the common ingroup identity model, we proposed that this paradox can be resolved through human resource management (HRM) strategies that promote inclusive hiring practices (e.g., by emphasizing fit with a diverse clientele). The results from a laboratory experiment were consistent with our predictions: Local recruiters preferred skilled local applicants over skilled immigrant applicants, but only when these applicants were qualified for a specific job. This bias against qualified and skilled immigrant applicants was attenuated when fit with a diverse clientele was emphasized, but not when fit with a homogeneous clientele was emphasized or when the hiring strategy was not explained. We discuss the implications of our findings for research on employment discrimination against skilled immigrants, including the role of inclusiveness for reducing discriminatory biases.