Between a rock and a soft place: microtopography of the locomotor substrate and the morphology of the setal fields of <scp>N</scp>amibian day geckos (<scp>G</scp>ekkota: <scp>G</scp>ekkonidae: <i><scp>R</scp>hoptropus</i>)
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
Abstract Many species of gekkotans possess adhesive subdigital pads that allow them to adhere to, and move on, a wide variety of surfaces. The natural surfaces exploited by these lizards may be rough, undulant and unpredictable and therefore likely provide only limited, patchy areas for adhesive contact. Here, we examine the microtopography of rock surfaces used by seven species of R hoptropus and compare this to several rough and smooth artificial surfaces employed in previous studies of gekkotan adhesion. These data are considered in relation to the form, configuration, compliance and functional morphology of the setal fields of these species. Our results demonstrate that natural rock surfaces are rough and unpredictable at the scale of the setal arrays, with equal amounts of variation existing within and between the various types of rock surfaces examined. Such surfaces differ from smooth and rough artificial surfaces in the proportion of surface area available for attachment and the relative predictability of surface undulance. Generally, setal field characteristics of individual species are not relatable to specific substrates, but instead are configured to allow for sufficient attachment to a wide variety of unpredictable surfaces. Our findings provide insight into the evolution and microanatomy of the adhesive system of gekkotan lizards and its adaptive relationship to topographically unpredictable surfaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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