A shift toward harmonics for high-frequency calling shown with phylogenetic study of frequency spectra in Eneopterinae crickets (Orthoptera, Grylloidea, Eneopteridae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dominant frequency is an important feature of cricket song, as it can be used for species recognition and mate choice. The dominant frequency usually ranges from 2 to 8 kHz and corresponds to the fundamental frequency of the song. In preliminary studies we documented high-frequency songs in the subfamily Eneopterinae. To analyse this phenomenon further, we investigate the spectral properties of these cricket songs. Based on the analysis of the frequency spectra in reference to phylogeny, we show that a shift of dominant frequency from the fundamental toward the second or the third harmonic of the song occurred in the Lebinthini tribe. In this clade the upper harmonics (second or third) become the most powerful frequencies of the song. From an evolutionary point of view, we document a case of convergence toward high-frequency calling between species of Eneoptera Burmeister, 1838, which emit alternatively low and high fundamental frequencies, and the Lebinthini, which emit high frequencies using upper harmonics. Functional hypotheses are discussed to explain how these high frequencies could be produced.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".