Plasticity in sexual size dimorphism and Rensch’s rule in Mediterranean blennies (Blenniidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative analyses of sexual size dimorphism (SSD) across species have led to the discovery of Rensch’s rule. This rule states that SSD increases with body size when males are the largest sex, but decreases with increasing size when females are larger. Within-species comparisons of SSD in fish are rare, yet these may be a valuable tool to investigate evolutionary patterns on a fine scale. This study compares SSD among closely related populations of three species of Mediterranean blennies (Blenniidae): Microlipophrys canevae (Vinciguerra, 1880), Parablennius incognitus (Bath 1968), and Aidablennius sphynx (Valenciennes, 1836). SSD varied more among populations than among species and Rensch’s rule was confirmed within two species. It is not likely that the variation among populations in SSD mirrors genetic variation, as many of the populations were in close proximity of one another, with a high potential for genetic exchange. This study complements larger scale analyses of other taxa and demonstrates the fine scale on which evolutionary processes responsible for Rensch’s rule may be operating.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".