MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Habitat-dependent reduction of sexual dimorphism in geometric body shape of Haida Gwaii threespine stickleback

2008· article· en· W2171198113 on OpenAlexaff
M. A. Spoljaric, T. E. Reimchen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Journal of the Linnean Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual dimorphismBiologyGasterosteusSticklebackMorphometricsLimnetic zoneHabitatEcologyCobbleBenthic zoneDorsal finZoologyDorsumLittoral zoneFisheryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the extent of sexual dimorphism in body shape in adult threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) from 39 lakes, eight streams, and five marine (two brackish, three full marine) localities on the Haida Gwaii archipelago off the mid-coast of British Columbia, as well as three lakes from southern British Columbia with benthic–limnetic species pairs. Based on digital images of 709 males and 593 females, body shape was quantified using discriminant function analysis on partial warp scores generated from twelve homologous landmarks. All populations showed males with higher positive values for canonical vector 1, which are characterized by larger heads, larger gape, posteriad dorsal spines, posteriad pelvis, longer anal fin, and deep posterior caudal depth relative to those in females. Geographical variability was present, with the highest dimorphism occurring in two of the marine habitats in addition to large lakes, whereas reduced dimorphism occurs in small shallow dystrophic ponds. We suggest that this reduction is the derived condition and is primarily due to loss of niche breadth and convergence in body shape between the sexes in pond habitats. Analyses of two experimental pond populations indicate that up to 15% of the shape dimorphism can be attributed to habitat-induced phenotypic plasticity.

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)0.001
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 score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.294
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

Citations53
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207