Ecological divergence and calcaneal‐cuboid morphology in gorillas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives Gorillas are diverse behaviorally and ecologically with higher frequencies of arboreality and frugivory observed in populations living at lower altitudes compared to those living at higher altitudes. Previous studies have shown that the more arboreal western lowland gorilla has hallucial tarsometatarsal and talocrural joint morphologies associated with enhanced hallucial abduction and foot inversion capabilities whereas the more terrestrial eastern gorilla does not. Here we examine how known ecological and behavioral differences among gorillas relate to variation in calcaneal and cuboid morphology. Specifically, we test whether gorillas that climb more frequently (i.e., western lowland and lowland grauer gorillas) have cuboid‐metatarsal and calcaneocuboid morphologies that facilitate increased foot mobility compared to those that climb less often (i.e., mountain and highland grauer gorillas). Methods We quantify the relative areas of articular and nonarticular surfaces, angles between articular surfaces, articular surface curvatures, the relative length and depth of the calcaneocuboid joint, and the relative size of the calcaneal tuber using three‐dimensional models of gorilla calcanei and cuboids ( n = 90 and 81, respectively). Results Our results, based on univariate and multivariate analyses, show that western and eastern gorillas follow our predicted arboreal‐terrestrial morphocline in terms of their calcaneal and cuboid morphology; however, highland and lowland grauer gorilla populations do not. Conclusions This study has implications for understanding gorilla foot function and the evolutionary processes responsible for producing the morphological patterns among living gorilla populations. Future studies of gorilla morphological diversity may provide a useful comparative model for studies of locomotor evolution in extinct clades.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".