MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1841981334 · doi:10.1111/evo.12360

EARLY EVOLUTION OF SEXUAL DIMORPHISM AND POLYGYNY IN PINNIPEDIA

2014· article· en· W1841981334 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas M. Cullen, Danielle Fraser, Natalia Rybczynski, Claudia J. Schröder-Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of NatureCarleton UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersPennsylvania State UniversitySmithsonian Institution
KeywordsSexual dimorphismPolygynyBiologyMating systemSexual selectionMatingTaxonEvolutionary biologyZoologyRange (aeronautics)EcologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexual selection is one of the earliest areas of interest in evolutionary biology. And yet, the evolutionary history of sexually dimorphic traits remains poorly characterized for most vertebrate lineages. Here, we report on evidence for the early evolution of dimorphism within a model mammal group, the pinnipeds. Pinnipeds show a range of sexual dimorphism and mating systems that span the extremes of modern mammals, from monomorphic taxa with isolated and dispersed mating to extreme size dimorphism with highly ordered polygynous harem systems. In addition, the degree of dimorphism in pinnipeds is closely tied to mating system, with strongly dimorphic taxa always exhibiting a polygynous system, and more monomorphic taxa possessing weakly polygynous systems. We perform a comparative morphological description, and provide evidence of extreme sexual dimorphism (similar to sea lions), in the Miocene-aged basal pinniped taxon Enaliarctos emlongi. Using a geometric morphometric approach and combining both modern and fossil taxa we show a close correlation between mating system and sex-related cranial dimorphism, and also reconstruct the ancestral mating system of extant pinnipeds as highly polygynous. The results suggest that sexual dimorphism and extreme polygyny in pinnipeds arose by 27 Ma, in association with changing climatic conditions.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations60
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207