MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977482044 · doi:10.1159/000110680

Does Phenotypic Plasticity Confound Attempts to Identify Hominin Fossil Species?

2007· review· en· W1977482044 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFolia Primatologica · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhenotypic plasticityEvolutionary biologyConfoundingPhenotypeTaxonomy (biology)ZoologyEcologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been hypothesised recently that masticatory strain-induced phenotypic plasticity complicates efforts to delineate species in the hominin fossil record. Here, we report a study that evaluated this hypothesis by subjecting craniodental data from 8 Old World monkey species to ANOVA and discriminant analysis. The study does not support the hypothesis. Characters associated with high masticatory strains were found to exhibit significantly higher levels of variability than low-to-moderately strained characters and dental characters, but the three sets of characters did not differ markedly in taxonomic utility. Moreover, the best discrimination was achieved when all variables were employed. These results suggest that phenotypic plasticity likely plays only a minor confounding role in hominin taxonomy, and that, rather than attempting to exclude phenotypically plastic characters, researchers should simply maximise the number of characters examined.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.303 · 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