Allometry and sexual dimorphism in three giant whip spider species (Amblypygi, Phrynidae, <i>Heterophrynus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amblypygids display high levels of sexual dimorphism, especially larger pedipalps in males compared to females. This study examines the difference in allometric rates as a potential cause of dimorphism in pedipalps and walking legs in three Heterophrynus species: Heterophrynus batesii (Butler, 1873); Heterophrynus longicornis (Butler, 1873), and Heterophrynus elaphus (Pocock, 1903). Dimorphism is observed in all studied appendages, but higher allometric rates are shown in males more than females for only the pedipalps (for all three species) and the first walking legs (for only H. elaphus), with higher dimorphism in the pedipalp for H. batesii and lower in H. elaphus. Dimorphism in pedipalps appears to be linked to species' mating system: larger dimorphism are observed in polygamous systems, whereas moderate and small dimorphisms are observed in monogamous and solitary species, respectively. Contrary to pedipalps, the evolution of walking legs seems to occur via natural selection rather than sexual selection.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".