MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1943947229 · doi:10.1111/eva.12300

Using an integrative approach to investigate the evolution of behaviour

2015· review· en· W1943947229 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadia Aubin‐Horth

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Applications · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesUniversity of Bern
KeywordsBiologyOrganismNatural selectionVariation (astronomy)Evolutionary biologyConvergent evolutionMechanism (biology)Selection (genetic algorithm)Diversity (politics)EcologyAdaptation (eye)Evolutionary ecologyCognitive scienceGeneNeuroscienceGeneticsPhylogeneticsPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behaviour is a central focus of interest in biology because it has an impact on several aspects of an organism's life. Evolutionary biologists have realised the advantage of an integrative approach that jointly studies the molecular, cellular and physiological levels of an individual to link them with the organismal behavioural phenotype. First, this mechanistic information helps in understanding physiological and evolutionary constraints acting on the behavioural response to the environment and its evolution. Second, it furthers our understanding of the process of molecular convergent evolution. Finally, we learn about natural variation in molecular, cellular and physiological traits present in wild populations and their underlying genetic basis, which can be a substrate for selection to act on. I illustrate these points using our work on behaviour variation in fishes. The information on the mechanistic bases of behaviour variation in various species and behaviours will contribute to an ecological annotation of genes and to uncover new mechanisms implicated in how this astonishing behavioural diversity arose, is maintained and will 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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionary ApplicationsSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207