The locus of sexual selection: moving sexual selection studies into the post‐genomics era
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
Sexual selection drives fundamental evolutionary processes such as trait elaboration and speciation. Despite this importance, there are surprisingly few examples of genes unequivocally responsible for variation in sexually selected phenotypes. This lack of information inhibits our ability to predict phenotypic change due to universal behaviours, such as fighting over mates and mate choice. Here, we discuss reasons for this apparent gap and provide recommendations for how it can be overcome by adopting contemporary genomic methods, exploiting underutilized taxa that may be ideal for detecting the effects of sexual selection and adopting appropriate experimental paradigms. Identifying genes that determine variation in sexually selected traits has the potential to improve theoretical models and reveal whether the genetic changes underlying phenotypic novelty utilize common or unique molecular mechanisms. Such a genomic approach to sexual selection will help answer questions in the evolution of sexually selected phenotypes that were first asked by Darwin and can furthermore serve as a model for the application of genomics in all areas of evolutionary biology.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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