Digit ratio (2D:4D) and behavioral differences between inbred mouse strains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digit ratio (2D:4D) is a trait, which is sexually differentiated in a variety of species. In humans, males typically have shorter second digits (2Ds) (index fingers) compared to fourth digits (4Ds) (ring fingers) whereas females' fingers are more equal in length. Smaller, more masculine, digit ratios are thought to be associated with higher prenatal testosterone levels, greater sensitivity to prenatal androgens or both. Men with more masculine digit ratios have shown increased ability, achievement and speed in sports and tend to report that they are more physically aggressive. Previous research has shown the same sexually differentiated pattern in the hind paws of laboratory mice as in human hands, males have lower 2D:4D than females. We measured hind paw digit ratio in mice of eight inbred strains. These measurements were made while blind to strain, sex and whether the paw was from the left or right side. We found large differences in digit ratio between the strains and suggest that inbred mice are a promising system for investigating the correlation between digit ratio and behavioral traits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".