MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mismeasure of secondary sexual traits: an example with horn growth in the <scp>I</scp>berian ibex

2012· article· en· W1927170957 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Sarasa, Ramón C. Soriguer, José Enrique Granados, Nicolas Casajus, Jesús M. Pérez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrench hornBiologyUngulateEcologyZoologyAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Monitoring programmes and studies focused on secondary sexual characters ( SSCs ) depend on the accuracy of measurements. However, methods of measurements of SSC , such as horns of ungulates, vary throughout the literature. Thus, the accuracy of horn growth measurements as proxies of true horn growth and the comparability of results inferred from different horn growth measurements may be questionable. We used the horns of Iberian ibex C apra pyrenaica to compare horn growth measurements and to analyse reliability with true horn growth. Our results reveal that measurements used in previous studies differed substantially from true horn growth and volume estimated as a barrel appeared as the best proxy of annular segments of horns in the Iberian ibex. Horn growth measurements are not necessarily mutually comparable, just as classical measurements are not necessarily representative of true horn growth. We discuss the wider implications of these results and suggest that biological processes linked to horns of ungulates should be reappraised using improved and accurate measurements because horn growth pattern is a key factor in sustainable management and conservation plans of ungulate species around the world.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207