Sexual difference in habitat use of Texas map turtles (Emydidae: <i>Graptemys versa</i>) and its relationship to size dimorphism and diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual differences in habitat use of map turtles (Graptemys spp.) have been attributed to differences in swimming ability as influenced by body size, because females are much larger than males, or to sexual differences in diet. Captures of young female Graptemys versa, which had body sizes similar to those of adult males but diet and trophic morphology more similar to those of larger females, allowed testing of these alternative hypotheses. A variety of single habitat variables measured at the sites of capture performed poorly in separating the three groups of turtles, but multivariate analysis and variables relating to position within the stream produced greater separation, indicating that complex combinations of factors probably influence habitat use. Young females were more similar in their habitat use to large females than to males, and their diet was also more similar to that of larger females, due primarily to the quantities of mollusks consumed. The data supported the hypothesis that habitat separation was the result of dietary rather than body size differences. While dietary differences are probably facilitated by sexual size dimorphism, they may not be the ultimate selective force that produced the size dimorphism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".