One tool, many uses: precopulatory sexual selection on genital morphology in<i>Aquarius remigis</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
While congruent evidence indicates that sexual selection is the most likely selective force explaining the rapid divergence of male genital morphology in insects, the mechanisms involved in this process remain unclear. In particular, little attention has been paid to precopulatory sexual selection. We examine sexual selection for mating success on male genital components in six populations of Aquarius remigis, a water strider characterized by unique genital morphology. Multivariate selection analysis confirms previous findings that precopulatory sexual selection favours longer external genitalia, and provides new evidence that this selection acts independently on external genital components. In contrast, the size of the major internal genital sclerite is not correlated with mating success. Thus, precopulatory sexual selection acts strongly on the size of the external genitalia, but not on the intromittent organ itself. These results highlight the multiple functions of genital organs and the importance of both precopulatory and post-copulatory sexual selection in shaping the remarkable diversity of male genitalia in insects.
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