Body size, sexual size dimorphism, and Rensch's rule in adult hydropsychid caddisflies (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body size influences most biological processes from metabolic rates to the outcome of interspecific interactions. Within a species, sexual size dimorphism (SSD) reflects either differential selection on body size of males and females or phylogenetic inertia. Among taxa, SSD should decrease as body size increases when females are the larger sex — a pattern known as Rensch's rule. We examined body size, SSD, and Rensch's rule among 29 species of adult hydropsychid caddisflies (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) and 12 closely related caddisfly species. Females were almost always larger than males in all species examined. Body size variation among genera was greater than variance among species. In contrast, the greatest variance in SSD was among species within a genus. Contrary to Rensch's rule, the degree of SSD did not change as body size increased among genera. Observed body size patterns suggest that hydropsychid caddisfly species within a genus may be subjected to similar selective pressures during the larval stage, but this issue remains to be investigated. In addition, our data suggest that hydropsychids may violate Rensch's rule, a pattern not often reported. Our data provide a basis for proposing and testing hypotheses about the ecology and evolution of hydropsychid caddisflies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".