Phenotypic Variation in Skull Size and Shape Between Newfoundland and Mainland Populations of North American Black Bears, <em>Ursus americanus</em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well recognized that differences in environmental selection pressures among populations can generate phenotypic divergence in a suite of morphological characteristics and associated life history traits. Previous analysis of mitochondrial DNA and body size have suggested that Black Bears (Ursus americanus) inhabiting the island of Newfoundland represent a different subspecies or ecotype from mainland populations. Assuming that body size covaries positively with skull size, we predicted that skull size would be greater for bears on the island than the mainland, and the distribution of size-related shape components in multivariate space should show a distinct separation between Newfoundland and mainland populations. Measurements of 1080 specimens from Newfoundland, Alberta, New York, and Quebec did not provide unequivocal support for our prediction that skull size in Newfoundland bears would be larger than bears from the mainland populations. After removing ontogenetic effects of skull size, between-population variation in skull shape was greater in females than males, and the analysis significantly separated Newfoundland bears from mainland populations. Explanations for this pattern are numerous, but currently remain hypothetical. Limited covariation between skull size and body size suggests that genetic traits regulating the size of Black Bear skulls are more heritable (i.e., less influenced by environmental selection pressures) than characteristics affecting body size. We hypothesize that if gape size does not limit prey size in solitary terrestrial carnivores, large degrees of among-population variation in body size should be coupled with little covariation in skull size. In general, sexual dimorphism in skull size and shape was marginal for the phenotypic characters measured in our study. We believe that sexual dimorphism in skull size in Black Bears is primarily driven by intrasexual selection in males for increased gape size display, while similarity in skull shape between sexes is associated with the constraints of a temporally-selective, but similar diet.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".