Dancing drives evolution of sexual size dimorphism in manakins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body size mediates life history, physiology and inter- and intra-specific interactions. Within species, sexes frequently differ in size, reflecting divergent selective pressures and/or constraints. Both sexual selection and differences in environmentally mediated reproductive constraints can drive sexual size dimorphism, but empirically testing causes of dimorphism is challenging. Manakins (Pipridae), a family of Neotropical birds comprising approximately 50 species, exhibit a broad range of size dimorphism from male- to female-biased and are distributed across gradients of precipitation and elevation. Males perform courtship displays ranging from simple hops to complex aerobatic manoeuvres. We tested associations between sexual size dimorphism and (a) agility and (b) environment, analysing morphological, behavioural and environmental data for 22 manakin species in a phylogenetic framework. Sexual dimorphism in mass was most strongly related to agility, with males being lighter than females in species performing more aerial display behaviours. However, wing and tarsus length dimorphism were more strongly associated with environmental variables, suggesting that different sources of selection act on different aspects of body size. These results highlight the strength of sexual selection in shaping morphology-even atypical patterns of dimorphism-while demonstrating the importance of constraints and ecological consequences of body size evolution.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".