Genital interactions during simulated copulation among marine mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genitalia are morphologically variable across many taxa and in physical contact during intromission, but little is known about how variation in form correlates with function during copulation. Marine mammals offer important insights into the evolutionary forces that act on genital morphology because they have diverse genitalia and are adapted to aquatic living and mating. Cetaceans have a fibroelastic penis and muscular vaginal folds, while pinnipeds have a baculum and lack vaginal folds. We examined copulatory fit in naturally deceased marine mammals to identify anatomical landmarks in contact during copulation and the potential depth of penile penetration into the vagina. Excised penises were artificially inflated to erection with pressurized saline and compared with silicone vaginal endocasts and within excised vaginas in simulated copulation using high-resolution, diffusible iodine-based, contrast-enhanced computed tomography. We found evidence suggestive of both congruent and antagonistic genital coevolution, depending on the species. We suggest that sexual selection influences morphological shape. This study improves our understanding of how mechanical interactions during copulation influence the shape of genitalia and affect fertility, and has broad applications to other taxa and species conservation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".