Patterns of ontogenetic evolution across extant marsupials reflect different allometric pathways to ecomorphological diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relatively high level of morphological diversity in Australasian marsupials compared to that observed among American marsupials remains poorly understood. We undertake a comprehensive macroevolutionary analysis of ontogenetic allometry of American and Australasian marsupials to examine whether the contrasting levels of morphological diversity in these groups are reflected in their patterns of allometric evolution. We collate ontogenetic series for 62 species and 18 families of marsupials (n = 2091 specimens), spanning across extant marsupial diversity. Our results demonstrate significant lability of ontogenetic allometric trajectories among American and Australasian marsupials, yet a phylogenetically structured pattern of allometric evolution is preserved. Here we show that species diverging more than 65 million years ago converge in their patterns of ontogenetic allometry under animalivorous and herbivorous diets, and that Australasian marsupials do not show significantly greater variation in patterns of ontogenetic allometry than their American counterparts, despite displaying greater magnitudes of extant ecomorphological diversity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".