MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546015893 · doi:10.1002/ece3.76

Phenotypic covariance structure and its divergence for acoustic mate attraction signals among four cricket species

2011· article· en· W1546015893 on OpenAlexafffund
Susan M. Bertram, Lauren P. Fitzsimmons, Emily M. McAuley, Howard D. Rundle, Root Gorelick

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaSimon Fraser UniversityCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPhenotypic traitEvolutionary biologyTraitContext (archaeology)Selection (genetic algorithm)Field cricketPhenotypeCovariancePopulationGeneticsStatisticsCricketZoologyMathematicsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phenotypic variance-covariance matrix (P) describes the multivariate distribution of a population in phenotypic space, providing direct insight into the appropriateness of measured traits within the context of multicollinearity (i.e., do they describe any significant variance that is independent of other traits), and whether trait covariances restrict the combinations of phenotypes available to selection. Given the importance of P, it is therefore surprising that phenotypic covariances are seldom jointly analyzed and that the dimensionality of P has rarely been investigated in a rigorous statistical framework. Here, we used a repeated measures approach to quantify P separately for populations of four cricket species using seven acoustic signaling traits thought to enhance mate attraction. P was of full or almost full dimensionality in all four species, indicating that all traits conveyed some information that was independent of the other traits, and that phenotypic trait covariances do not constrain the combinations of signaling traits available to selection. P also differed significantly among species, although the dominant axis of phenotypic variation (p(max)) was largely shared among three of the species (Acheta domesticus, Gryllus assimilis, G. texensis), but different in the fourth (G. veletis). In G. veletis and A. domesticus, but not G. assimilis and G. texensis, p(max) was correlated with body size, while p(max) was not correlated with residual mass (a condition measure) in any of the species. This study reveals the importance of jointly analyzing phenotypic traits.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207