MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045003306 · doi:10.1002/ajp.23175

Mandibular shape variation in mainland and insular hylobatids

2020· article· en· W3045003306 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Kathleen Pitirri, Erin Vermeulen, Klara Komza, David R. Begun

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Primatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHylobatesBiologyPrimateIntraspecific competitionAllometryProcrustes analysisInterspecific competitionVariation (astronomy)ZoologyMasticationSexual dimorphismEvolutionary biologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although hylobatids are the most speciose of the living apes, their morphological interspecies and intraspecies variation remains poorly understood. Here, we assess mandibular shape variation in two species of Hylobates, white-handed (Hylobates lar) and black-handed (Hylobates agilis) gibbons. Using 71 three-dimensional landmarks to quantify mandibular shape, interspecies and intraspecies variation and geographic patterns of mandibular shape are examined in a mixed sex sample of adult H. lar and H. agilis through generalized Procrustes analysis, Procrustes analysis of variance, and principal components analysis. We find that relative to H. agilis, H. lar exhibits a higher amount of variation in mandibular shape. Both species demonstrate similar allometric patterns in mandibular shape. We also highlight a geographic pattern in mandibular shape variation. Compared to mainland hylobatids, insular hylobatids have relatively lower, more posteriorly oriented, and anteroposteriorly wider mandibular condyles, with an increased distance between the condyles and the coronoid processes. This geographic pattern could reflect differences in functional demands on the mandible during mastication and/or could be driven by factors often associated with evolutionary pressures of island populations relative to mainland populations. The findings of this study highlight how little is known about Hylobates morphological variation and how important this is for using Hylobates to help interpret the primate fossil record. Understanding interspecific and intraspecific variation in extant primates is vital to interpreting variation in the primate fossil record.

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)0.000
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PrimatologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207