Heterothermy, body size, and locomotion as ecological predictors of migration in mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Migration is ubiquitous among animals and has evolved repeatedly and independently. Comparative studies of the evolutionary origins of migration in birds are widespread, but are lacking in mammals. Mammalian species have greater variation in functional traits that may be relevant for migration. Interspecific variation in migration behaviour is often attributed to mode of locomotion (i.e. running, swimming, and flying) and body size, but traits associated with the evolutionary precursor hypothesis, including geographic distribution, habitat, and diet, could also be important predictors of migration in mammals. Furthermore, mammals vary in thermoregulatory strategies and include many heterothermic species, providing an alternative strategy to avoid seasonal resource depletion. We tested the evolutionary precursor hypothesis for the evolution of migration in mammals and tested predictions linking migration to locomotion, body size, geographic distribution, habitat, diet, and thermoregulation. We compiled a dataset of 722 species from 27 mammalian orders and conducted a series of analyses using phylogenetically informed models. Swimming and flying mammals were more likely to migrate than running mammals, and larger species were more likely to migrate than smaller ones. However, heterothermy was common among small running mammals that were unlikely to migrate. High‐latitude swimming and flying mammals were more likely to migrate than high‐latitude running mammals (where heterothermy was common), and most migratory running mammals were herbivorous. Running mammals and frugivorous bats with high thermoregulatory scope (greater capacity for heterothermy) were less likely to migrate, while insectivorous bats with high thermoregulatory scope were more likely to migrate. Our results indicate a broad range of factors that influence migration, depending on locomotion, body size, and thermoregulation. Our analysis of migration in mammals provided insight into some of the general rules of migration, and we highlight opportunities for future investigations of exceptions to these rules, ultimately leading to a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of migration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".