Social behavior and sexual dimorphism in the Bonaire whiptail, <i>Cnemidophorus murinus</i> (Squamata: Teiidae): the role of sexual selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We measured body dimensions and coloration and quantified the behavior of females and males of two color phases in the Bonaire whiptail, Cnemidophorus murinus, to begin addressing the ultimate causation for sexual dimorphism in this species. Examination of size-adjusted body dimensions revealed that males have wider, longer, and deeper heads as well as somewhat longer forelegs and hind legs. Males were characterized by two distinct coloration patterns. Blue males displayed purple–blue dewlaps, blue–gray background coloration on the head and anterior torso, numerous light blue spots on the flanks, brown–orange coloration on the posterior torso, and a turquoise section on the proximal portion of the tail. By contrast, brown males were uniform olive–green to yellow–brown, with the exception of light blue spots on the lateral torso. Females were colored like brown males but lacked the blue spots. Testis length scaled with body size. Testes of only 26% of brown males were active, whereas all blue males had active testes. Blue males initiated aggressive encounters involving chases and displays directed toward other males much more frequently than females were aggressive with consexuals or with either type of male. Brown males were not observed to initiate aggression. Most blue male aggression was directed toward other blue males (70.6% of encounters), whereas 29.4% of encounters were with brown males. Blue males initiated 85.7% of the courtship encounters observed compared with only 7.1% initiated by brown males and 7.2% by females. Male-biased dimorphism in head and leg dimensions as well as coloration, together with higher rates of intrasexual aggression and courtship activity by blue males, are consistent with the hypothesis that sexual selection explains the evolution of sexual dimorphism in C. murinus.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".