A functional trade-off between trophic adaptation and parental care predicts sexual dimorphism in cichlid fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although sexual dimorphism is widespread in nature, its evolutionary causes often remain elusive. Here we report a case where a sex-specific conflicting functional demand related to parental care, but not to sexual selection, explains sexual dimorphism in a primarily trophic structure, the gill rakers of cichlid fishes. More specifically, we examined gill raker length in a representative set of cichlid fish species from Lake Tanganyika featuring three different parental care strategies: (i) uni-parental mouthbrooding, whereby only one parental sex incubates the eggs in the buccal cavity; (ii) bi-parental mouthbrooding, whereby both parents participate in mouthbrooding; and (iii) nest guarding without any mouthbrooding involved. As predicted from these different parental care strategies, we find sexual dimorphism in gill raker length to be present only in uni-parental mouthbrooders, but not in bi-parental mouthbrooders nor in nest guarders. Moreover, variation in the extent of sexual dimorphism among uni-parental mouthbrooders appears to be related to trophic ecology. Overall, we present a previously unrecognized scenario for the evolution of sexual dimorphism that is not related to sexual selection or initial niche divergence between sexes. Instead, sexual dimorphism in gill raker length in uni-parental mouthbrooding cichlid fish appears to be the consequence of a sex-specific functional trade-off between a trophic function present in both sexes and a reproductive function present only in the brooding sex.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".