Intra‐specific variation of non‐genitalic and genitalic traits in two euophryine jumping spider species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Intra‐specific variation pattern is informative to understanding the evolution of morphological traits, but has been rarely studied in jumping spiders. Here we investigate the intra‐specific variation of non‐genitalic and genitalic traits in two euophryine jumping spider species that show considerable difference in sexual dimorphism: Chapoda recondita (Peckham & Peckham, 1896) and Antillattus cambridgei (Bryant, 1943). The results show the pre‐copulatory sexually selected traits (e.g. male chelicerae) tend to have positive intra‐specific allometry, and thus may have evolved under strong directional selection. The genitalic traits and some non‐genitalic traits tend to show negative allometries. Unlike non‐genitalic traits, the genitalic traits usually have high size‐corrected intra‐specific variation (CV’). Factors that may account for the negative allometry and high size‐corrected intra‐specific variation in genitalic traits are discussed. Pre‐ and post‐copulatory sexual selection may coexist in species and whether there is a trade‐off between these two selection mechanisms remains to be investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".