MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cultural traditions and the evolution of reproductive isolation: ecological speciation in killer whales?

2012· article· en· W2156414867 on OpenAlexaff
Rüdiger Riesch, Lance Barrett‐Lennard, Graeme M. Ellis, John K. B. Ford, Volker B. Deecke

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Journal of the Linnean Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaVancouver Aquarium
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyReproductive isolationSympatryGenetic algorithmDivergence (linguistics)EcologyEcological speciationEvolutionary biologySympatric speciationIncipient speciationPopulationGenetic variationGene flowGeneDemographyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human evolution has clearly been shaped by gene–culture interactions, and there is growing evidence that similar processes act on populations of non-human animals as well. Recent theoretical studies have shown that culture can be an important evolutionary mechanism due to the ability of cultural traits to spread rapidly both vertically and horizontally, resulting in decreased within-group variance and increased between-group variance. Here, we collate the extensive literature on population divergence in killer whales (Orcinus orca) and argue that they are undergoing ecological speciation as a result of dietary specializations. While we cannot exclude the possibility that cultural divergence predates ecological divergence, we propose that cultural differences in the form of learned behaviors between ecologically-divergent killer whale populations have resulted in sufficient reproductive isolation in sympatry to lead to incipient speciation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations158
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207