MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Persistence and regression of hearing in the exclusively diurnal moths, <i>Trichodezia albovittata</i> (Geometridae) and <i>Lycomorpha pholus</i> (Arctiidae)

2004· article· en· W1966949491 on OpenAlexafffund
Katherine E. Muma, James H. Fullard

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Entomology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyNocturnalSympatric speciationPopulationZoologySensory systemAudiologyEcologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. 1. Auditory sensitivities and ultrasound avoidance behaviour of two exclusively diurnal moths were examined to test the prediction that total isolation from the predatory effects of echolocating bats will result in the regression of these sensory systems and/or the defences they evoke. 2. The silent geometrid, Trichodezia albovittata , possessed large ears with auditory neural thresholds similar to or better than those of a sympatric, exclusively nocturnal geometrid moth. Trichodezia albovittata readily responded with evasive flight to ultrasound and it is suggested that if this moth has become completely isolated from bats its ears are functionally vestigial, at least in the population studied here. 3. In contrast, while the sound‐producing arctiid, Lycomorpha pholus , had low auditory sensitivity based on neural thresholds, it still responded with flight changes to ultrasound. It did not, however, produce sounds when stimulated ultrasonically. It is suggested that the ears of this moth are functionally vestigial for bat‐detection purposes but may be used for short‐distance social communication.

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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological EntomologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207