Digit identity matters: origin and evolution of sexual dimorphism in the digit lengths of tropidurid lizards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sexual dimorphism in digit lengths reflects phenotypic evolution mediated by developmental steroids. Differences in the identity of the sexually-dimorphic digit may evolve if the concentrations of sex-steroid receptors in the digit are easily modified and the initial changes have low impact on fitness. Accordingly, sexual dimorphism in digit lengths might initially originate under neutral selective regimes, being subsequently co-opted by embryonic hormonal effects on sensitive traits that are more likely to be targeted by selection. Correlated variation among sexually-dimorphic traits might therefore reflect pleiotropic hormonal modulation during development. Moreover, the identity and trend of the sexually-dimorphic digit might be evolutionarily labile even among closely-related species. We evaluated this model by assessing the identity of sexually-dimorphic digits among 11 Tropiduridae lizard species and inferring evolutionary patterns of sexual dimorphism. Assuming that digit lengths can be used as a proxy for hormonal modulation of steroid-sensitive traits during development, we tested for evolutionary associations among sexual dimorphism of digit lengths, body size and other traits that may be direct targets of sexual selection in the Tropiduridae. Sexual dimorphism in digit lengths is evolutionarily labile in the Tropiduridae, and diversity, instead of conservatism, seems to rule developmental mechanisms underlying the evolution of sexual dimorphism in digit ratios.
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) | 0.002 | 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".