Why are rare traits unilaterally expressed?: Trait frequency and unilateral expression for cranial nonmetric traits in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on an analysis of nonmetric trait databases from several large skeletal series in Northern Europe and South America, representing 27 bilateral traits, we report a predictable relationship between the frequency of nonmetric traits and the probability that they are expressed bilaterally. In a wider sampling of traits and populations, this study thus confirms the findings of an earlier study by Ossenberg ([1981] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 54:471-479), which reported the same relationship for two mandibular traits. This trend was previously explained by extending the multifactorial threshold model for discontinuous traits to incorporate either separate thresholds for unilateral or bilateral expression, or by a fuzzy threshold in which the probability of bilateral expression increases away from the median threshold value. We show that the trend is produced under the standard multifactorial threshold model for discontinuous traits simply if the within-individual or developmental instability variance remains relatively constant across the range of liability. Under this assumption, the number of individuals in which one side but not the other is pushed over the threshold for trait formation will be a larger proportion of the number of individuals expressing the trait when the trait frequency is low. As trait frequency increases, the significance of within-individual variance as a determinant of trait formation decreases relative to the genetic and among-individual environmental variance. These results have implications for interpreting nonmetric trait data as well as for understanding the prevalence of unilateral vs. bilateral expression of a wide variety of discontinuous traits, including dysmorphologies in humans.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".