Bergmann's rule in the oceans? Temperature strongly correlates with global interspecific patterns of body size in marine mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim Bergmann's rule remains unexplored in marine mammals. We first examine at a global extent whether these organisms show the same interspecific pattern reported for terrestrial mammals and then evaluate the influence of current environmental conditions and human impacts on the observed patterns. Location Global. Methods We used range maps to document interspecific body size gradients and examined six environmental and human‐based hypotheses. We analysed the data using a comparative cross‐species method and a spatially explicit assemblage approach at three different grain sizes (200 km × 200 km, 400 km × 400 km and 800 km × 800 km). The associations between hypothesis‐linked predictors and body size were analysed through simple and multiple regressions that controlled for both spatial and phylogenetic autocorrelation. Results We detected clear global latitudinal body size gradients, following a Bergmannian pattern (i.e. increasing size polewards). Consistently across methodological approaches (cross‐species and assemblage analyses) and grain sizes, sea surface temperature is the best predictor. Spatially, the temperature–size relationship is stronger in the Southern than in the Northern Hemisphere. Pinniped body sizes are critically constrained by temperature world‐wide whereas cetacean size clines show a weaker, albeit dominant, association with temperature. Main conclusions As in terrestrial mammals, our findings show that ambient temperature better explains interspecific body size patterns in cetaceans, and especially pinnipeds, world‐wide. Large‐bodied species are favoured in colder environments, in accordance with Bergmann's rule and the heat conservation hypothesis. However, our analyses also reveal a relevant role for salinity and primary productivity in migratory cetacean species. The large body sizes of baleen whales are essential for migration, for survival during fasting periods and minimizing the effects of temperature variation. This finding highlights the importance of spatially and phylogenetically explicit deconstructive approaches, considering alternative hypotheses to the traditional physiological mechanism, to gain a better understanding of Bergmann's rule.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".