MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Growth and sexual dimorphism in a population of hybrid macaques

2006· article· en· W2015315762 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael A. Schillaci, J. W. Froehlich, Jatna Supriatna

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersConnaught FundUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSexual dimorphismBiologyPopulationAllometryOntogenyZoologyCercopithecidaeSex characteristicsPrimateEvolutionary biologyEcologyDemographyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Growth and sexual dimorphism have long been the focus of investigation for researchers interested in the life history and socioecology of nonhuman primates. Previous research has shown that sex differences in the duration of growth, or bimaturism, are primarily responsible for the sexual dimorphism observed in anthropoid primates with multimale–multifemale social structure, such as macaques. The present study investigates sex differences in patterns of craniofacial and somatometric growth relative to head and body size and relative to dental development in a population of hybrid macaques (Cercopithecidae: Macaca ) from Sulawesi, Indonesia. How these patterns may contribute to sexual dimorphism in this hybrid population is also examined. The results of the study suggest that there is no substantial effect on the levels of sexual dimorphism associated with hybridization in these macaques. Although sex differences in patterns of size‐related, or allometric, growth patterns play a significant role in the development of sexual dimorphism for some cranial dimensions in these hybrids, bimaturism seems to be the primary component in the ontogeny of sexual dimorphism in this hybrid population. The observed levels of hybrid dimorphism and the predominant ontogenetic pattern of bimaturism characterized by prolonged male growth are consistent with previously published reports on dimorphism and growth in other cercopithecine primates.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ZoologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207