The evolution of aposematism is accompanied by increased diversification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the use of distinct colors to indicate unprofitability to predators (i.e. aposematism) is commonly thought of as an adaptation, our knowledge of its macroevolutionary effects is limited. Because aposematism is expected to decrease attacks by predators, we hypothesized that aposematic lineages should be larger on average than their non-aposematic sister groups because of the decreased probability of extinction and/or increased probability of speciation (i.e. increased diversification). The results of our sister-group analysis are consistent with the hypothesis that the evolution of aposematism is accompanied by increased diversification of lineages, with the aposematic focal group having more species in 11 of 14 pairs of sister groups. Despite the apparent advantages of reduced predation risk on diversification rates, the evolution of aposematism is relatively rare and reversions to a cryptic state are not uncommon. In addition to the difficulties in evolving a trait that initially decreases the survivorship of prey among naive predators, we discuss other factors that may limit the apparent prevalence and success of aposematism. It is hoped that the results of our analysis will encourage further analyses of the phylogenetic relationships among aposematic groups and their relatives, and of the evolutionary time scales over which the benefits of aposematism are the greatest to lineages with this condition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it