Biometrical analysis reveals major differences between the two subspecies of the European rabbit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The climatic oscillations that have occurred in the last few million years have strongly affected species distribution ranges. Highly divergent genetic lineages arose, some of which correspond to recognized subspecies that currently occupy small geographical areas. Understanding the implications of the genetic differences between these subspecies is crucial for proper conservation of Evolutionarily Significant Units. We use the two European rabbit subspecies, Oryctolagus cuniculus cuniculus and O. c. algirus, in the Iberian Peninsula as a model to investigate the repercussions at the biometric level of their largely recognized genetic differentiation. To accomplish this we analysed the ear and hind foot length, and the body mass of 999 adult rabbits from 27 locations across the distribution range of both subspecies in their native range, the Iberian Peninsula. Our results show biometric differences between the two subspecies, also explained by geographical location and sex, O. c. algirus being lighter and having shorter ear and hind foot lengths. We examine these findings under an evolutionary framework, and discuss their implications for current conservation efforts. Future research should focus on the ecological implications of these biometric differences, namely potential different habitat use and anti-predatory strategies in the species' native range.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".