Function, ontogeny and canalization of shape variance in the primate scapula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primates have shoulders adapted to a wide range of locomotor functions from terrestrial pronograde quadrupedalism to highly arboreal suspensory behaviours. The shape of the scapula tightly follows these functional differences. Previous analyses of primate postcrania, including the scapula, indicate that quadrupedal monkeys are less variable than non-quadrupeds. It was previously suggested that this difference was due to a relationship between the strength of stabilizing selection and the functional demands of the upper limb. Here it is shown that intraspecific scapular shape variance is highly correlated with the degree of committed quadrupedalism. Primates that engage in frequent suspensory behaviours (e.g. apes and ateline monkeys) average twice the amount of shape variance as quadrupeds (e.g. Old World monkeys and Saimiri). Because this difference in intraspecific shape variance is apparent in infants and does not increase or decrease appreciably over ontogeny, it is not likely that differences in postnatal growth, neuromuscular control or environmental factors such as habitat structure/composition are the primary contributors to differences in adult shape variance. Instead variance in embryonic factors that affect the shape/size of the scapula or epigenetic factors associated with muscle attachments are more likely candidates. In particular, the heterogeneous functional demands of the non-quadrupedal shoulder probably reduce the stringency of stabilizing selection, resulting in the persistence into adulthood of increased amounts of embryonically generated scapular shape variance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".