Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is not clear whether Bergmann's rule, larger size within species in cooler areas, holds for any group of ectotherms. Data are presented and used to test whether amphibians show body-size patterns that follow Bergmann's rule. Available data with respect to latitude and elevation suggest that amphibians in general follow Bergmann's rule, with 23 of 34 species showing a larger body size at higher latitudes or elevations and an overall grand mean correlation coefficient of +0.35 for size with latitude or elevation. Salamanders show body-size patterns consistent with the overall trend, with 13 of 18 species having a larger body size at higher latitudes or elevations and a grand mean correlation coefficient of +0.42 for size with latitude or elevation. Anurans show a weaker trend towards concordance with Bergmann's rule with respect to latitude and elevation (10 of 16 species), but the grand mean correlation coefficient is significantly positive (+0.31). The relationship between body size and environmental temperature is less clear. Overall, amphibians show weak concordance with Bergmann's rule (9 of 16 species). The results of the only two studies of salamanders are consistent with Bergmann's rule; however, data for anurans show no trend (7 of 14 species in accordance). Thus, while salamanders appear to follow Bergmann's rule, any trends in anurans are tentative.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".