The relative influences of sexual and natural selection upon the evolution of male nuptial colouration in the brook stickleback, Culaea inconstans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Previous research suggests that the temporal cycling of nuptial colour in a population of brook stickleback, Culaea inconstans, from the Atlantic lineage mirrors that described for its close relative, the three-spine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus.(2) We report an alternative cycling of nuptial colour in a population of brook sticklebacks from Nebraska corresponding to the Mississippian lineage. Males in this population do not assume characteristic black nuptial dress during courtship activities but do become highly melanic during the final days of fry guarding.(3) We also report the first evidence of the plesiomorphic nuptial barring pattern in female brook sticklebacks.(4) The loss of the nuptial signal during courtship and its maximal expression during parental care likely reflects fluctuating relative influences of sexual and natural selection vectors and suggests that at least two pathways of colour evolution are operating within the stickleback family.(5) Geographic variability in the nuptial colour signal of the brook stickleback may have significant implications for mate recognition, should allopatric divergent populations be brought back into contact.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".