Morphological evidence of correlational selection and ecological segregation between dextral and sinistral forms in a polymorphic flatfish, <i>Platichthys stellatus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenotypic polymorphisms in natural systems are often maintained by ecological selection, but only if niche segregation between morphs exists. Polymorphism for eyed-side direction is rare among the approximately 700 species of flatfish (Pleuronectiformes), and the evolutionary mechanisms that maintain it are unknown. Platichthys stellatus (starry flounder) is a polymorphic pleuronectid flatfish exhibiting large, clinal variation in proportion of left-eyed (sinistral) morphs, from 50% in California to 100% in Japan. Here I examined multiple traits related to swimming and foraging performance between sinistral and dextral morphs of P. stellatus from 12 sites to investigate if the two morphs differ in ways that may affect function and ecology. Direction of body asymmetry was correlated with several other characters: on an average, dextral morphs had longer, wider caudal peduncles, shorter snouts and fewer gill rakers than sinistral morphs. Although the differences were small in magnitude, they were consistent in direction across samples, implying that dextral and sinistral starry flounder may be targeting different prey types. Morphological differences between morphs were greatest in samples where the chances of competitive interactions between them were the greatest. These results suggest that the two morphs are not ecologically identical, may represent a rare example of divergent selection maintaining polymorphism of asymmetric forms, and that correlational selection between body asymmetry and other characters may be driven by competitive interactions between sinistral and dextral flatfish. This study is one of very few that demonstrates the ecological significance of direction in a species with polymorphic asymmetric forms.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".