Size selection by a gape‐limited predator of a marine snail: Insights into magic traits for speciation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The intertidal snail Littorina saxatilis has repeatedly evolved two parallel ecotypes assumed to be wave adapted and predatory shore crab adapted, but the magnitude and targets of predator‐driven selection are unknown. In Spain, a small, wave ecotype with a large aperture from the lower shore and a large, thick‐shelled crab ecotype from the upper shore meet in the mid‐shore and show partial size‐assortative mating. We performed complementary field tethering and laboratory predation experiments; the first set compared the survival of two different size‐classes of the crab ecotype while the second compared the same size‐class of the two ecotypes. In the first set, the large size‐class of the crab ecotype survived significantly better than the small size‐class both on the upper shore and in the laboratory. In the second set, the small size‐class of the crab ecotype survived substantially better than that of the wave ecotype both on the upper shore and in the laboratory. Shell‐breaking predation on tethered snails was almost absent within the lower shore. In the laboratory shore crabs ( P achygrapsus marmoratus ) with larger claw heights selected most strongly against the small size‐class of the crab ecotype, whereas those with medium claw heights selected most strongly against the thin‐shelled wave ecotype. Sexual maturity occurred at a much larger size in the crab ecotype than in the wave ecotype. Our results showed that selection on the upper shore for rapid attainment of a size refuge from this gape‐limited predator favors large size, thick shells, and late maturity. Model parameterization showed that size‐selective predation restricted to the upper shore resulted in the evolution of the crab ecotype despite gene flow from the wave ecotype snails living on the lower shore. These results on gape‐limited predation and previous ones showing size‐assortative mating between ecotypes suggest that size may represent a magic trait for the thick‐shelled ecotype.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".