Beyond the phenotypic gambit: molecular behavioural ecology and the evolution of genetic architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most studies of behaviour examine traits whose proximate causes include sensory input and neural decision-making, but conflict and collaboration in biological systems began long before brains or sensory systems evolved. Many behaviours result from non-neural mechanisms such as direct physical contact between recognition proteins or modifications of development that coincide with altered behaviour. These simple molecular mechanisms form the basis of important biological functions and can enact organismal interactions that are as subtle, strategic and interesting as any. The genetic changes that underlie divergent molecular behaviours are often targets of selection, indicating that their functional variation has important fitness consequences. These behaviours evolve by discrete units of quantifiable phenotypic effect (amino acid and regulatory mutations, often by successive mutations of the same gene), so the role of selection in shaping evolutionary change can be evaluated on the scale at which heritable phenotypic variation originates. We describe experimental strategies for finding genes that underlie biochemical and developmental alterations of behaviour, survey the existing literature highlighting cases where the simplicity of molecular behaviours has allowed insight to the evolutionary process and discuss the utility of a genetic knowledge of the sources and spectrum of phenotypic variation for a deeper understanding of how genetic and phenotypic architectures evolve.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".