MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of a Model System: New Insights from the Study of <i>Anolis</i> Lizards

2023· article· en· W4386054419 on OpenAlexafffund
Martha M. Muñoz, Luke O. Frishkoff, Jenna E. Pruett, D. Luke Mahler

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAnolisEcologyAnthropoceneEvolutionary ecologyHabitatBiologyAdaptation (eye)UrbanizationEvolutionary biologyLizard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following decades of intensive study, Anolis lizards have emerged as a biological model system. We review how new research on anoles has advanced our understanding of ecology and evolution, challenging long-standing paradigms and opening new areas of inquiry. Recent anole research reveals how changes in behavior can restructure ecological communities and can both stimulate and stymie evolution, sometimes simultaneously. Likewise, investigation of anoles as spatial or phylogenetic evolutionary experiments has documented evolutionary repeatability across spatiotemporal scales, while also illuminating its limits. Current research places anoles as a promising model for Anthropocene biology, with recent work illustrating how species respond as humans reconfigure natural habitats, alter the climate, and create novel environments and communities through urbanization and species introduction. Combined with ongoing methodological developments in genomics, phylogenetics, and ecology, the growing foundational knowledge of Anolis positions them as a powerful model system in ecology and evolution for years to come.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Ecology Evolution and SystematicsSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207