MORPHOLOGICAL INTEGRATION BETWEEN DEVELOPMENTAL COMPARTMENTS IN THE DROSOPHILA WING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developmental integration is the covariation among morphological structures due to connections between the developmental processes that built them. Here we use the methods of geometric morphometrics to study integration in the wing of Drosophila melanogaster. In particular, we focus on the hypothesis that the anterior and posterior wing compartments are separate developmental units that vary independently. We measured both variation among genetically diverse individuals and random differences between body sides of single individuals (fluctuating asymmetry, FA). For both of these sources of variation, the patterns of variation identified by principal component analyses all involved landmarks in both the anterior and posterior compartments simultaneously. Analyses focusing exclusively on the covariation between the anterior and posterior compartments, by the partial least-squares method, revealed pervasive integration of the two compartments, for both individual variation and FA. These analyses clearly indicate that the anterior and posterior compartments are not separate units of variation, but that the covariation between compartments is sufficient to account for nearly all the variation throughout the entire wing. We conclude that variation among individuals as well as the developmental perturbations responsible for FA generate shape variation primarily through developmental processes that are integrated across both compartments. In contrast, much less of the shape variation in our sample can be attributed to the localized processes that establish the identity of particular wing veins.Corresponding Editor: M. Zelditch
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".