Like a glove: do the dimensions of male adanal suckers and tritonymphal female docking papillae correlate in the Proctophyllodidae (Astigmata: Analgoidea)?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precopulatory guarding of tritonymphal females by adult males is common in feather mites (Acari: Astigmata). Within the Proctophyllodidae (Astigmata: Analgoidea), some genera possess morphological features in both sexes that have been suggested to enhance male attachment. One such structure in tritonymphal females is the development of a pair of fleshy lobe-like docking papillae, while males possess a pair of ventral adanal suckers that are proposed to fit over top of these projections. To determine whether these structures are strongly correlated in size, we measured the dimensions of the male adanal suckers and tritonymphal female docking papillae in three genera of mites: Neodectes spp. Park and Atyeo, 1971, Proterothrix spp. Gaud, 1968 (Proctophyllodidae: Pterodectinae), and Proctophyllodes spp. Robin, 1877 (Proctophyllodidae: Proctophyllodinae). We looked for correlations in these measurements as an indication of selective cooperation. Our results did not reveal strong positive correlations between the dimensions of these structures in tritonymphal females and adult males. We propose several reasons for why we may not have detected strong evidence of a good fit between anal suckers and tritonymphal papillae that are related to the biology of feather mites, and suggest steps to expand on this research in future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".