MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365445776 · doi:10.1126/science.abq2835

The evolution of hominoid locomotor versatility: Evidence from Moroto, a 21 Ma site in Uganda

2023· article· en· W4365445776 on OpenAlexaff
Laura MacLatchy, Susanne Cote, Alan L. Deino, Robert Kityo, Amon A. T. Mugume, James B. Rossie, William J. Sanders, Miranda N. Cosman, Steven G. Driese, David L. Fox, April J. Freeman, Rutger J. W. Jansma, Kirsten Jenkins, Rahab N. Kinyanjui, William E. Lukens, Kieran P. McNulty, Alice Novello, Daniel J. Peppe, Caroline A. E. Strömberg, Kevin T. Uno, Alisa J. Winkler, John D. Kingston

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWoodlandForagingContext (archaeology)BiologyEcologyVegetation (pathology)GeographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Living hominoids are distinguished by upright torsos and versatile locomotion. It is hypothesized that these features evolved for feeding on fruit from terminal branches in forests. To investigate the evolutionary context of hominoid adaptive origins, we analyzed multiple paleoenvironmental proxies in conjunction with hominoid fossils from the Moroto II site in Uganda. The data indicate seasonally dry woodlands with the earliest evidence of abundant C 4 grasses in Africa based on a confirmed age of 21 million years ago (Ma). We demonstrate that the leaf-eating hominoid Morotopithecus consumed water-stressed vegetation, and postcrania from the site indicate ape-like locomotor adaptations. These findings suggest that the origin of hominoid locomotor versatility is associated with foraging on leaves in heterogeneous, open woodlands rather than forests.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207