MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622011677 · doi:10.2744/ccb-1235.1

Assessing Head Morphology Dimorphism in the Midland Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta marginata) Using a Photographic Questionnaire

2017· article· en· W2622011677 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick D. Moldowan, Ronald J. Brooks, Jacqueline D. Litzgus

Bibliographic record

VenueChelonian Conservation and Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual dimorphismMorphometricsPainted turtleBiologyZoologyMorphology (biology)PopulationAnatomyTurtle (robot)DemographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to identify the sex of animals accurately is important in population studies. Emydid turtles (Testudines: Emydidae) demonstrate a number of sexually dimorphic characters, including head (cranial) size and structure. Field observations from a long-term study of midland painted turtles (Chrysemys picta marginata) in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada, suggested distinct differences in external head morphology between the sexes. We evaluated these putative sexual differences in C. picta head morphology by conducting a visual questionnaire involving human observers of varying levels of experience (novice, beginner, intermediate, and advanced). Observers were capable of distinguishing the sexes based solely on head morphology with a high degree of accuracy (between 79% and 86% success) across experience levels. Observers identified head shape as a defining character distinguishing the sexes. We suggest that visual questionnaires are a quantifiable method of assessing dimorphic characters that can be used in addition to traditional morphometrics or geometric morphometrics to demonstrate a visual, rather than simply statistical, difference among characters and sexes. Despite the breadth of research conducted on C. picta, our study is among the first to describe, assess, and discuss the functional significance of head dimorphism in this model species.

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)0.000
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChelonian Conservation and BiologySame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207