A comparative test of the correlated evolution of flightlessness and relative brain size in birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Secondary flightlessness has evolved independently many times in birds. Morphological changes in the pectoral girdle and flight feathers and changes in body size have been associated with the evolution of flightlessness, and it has also been suggested that flightless birds have relatively small brains. We therefore tested whether flightlessness is related to changes in relative brain size. Relative brain size was compared between volant and flightless species using both conventional statistics and modern comparative methods within nine taxonomic groups. No significant difference was found between flightless and volant species in six of these groups, regardless of whether body mass or tibiotarsal measurements were used as estimates of body size. Species with relatively smaller brains compared with their volant relatives were the great auk Pinguinus impennis , the kakapo Strigops habroptilus and some species of penguin. Thus, we found no evidence of a general correlation between the evolution of secondary flightlessness and the evolution of relatively small brains in birds. This suggests that neural requirements are not significantly different between flightless and volant species, although our methods may have overlooked subtle neurological changes that do not result in markedly different endocranial volumes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".