MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388769353 · doi:10.1111/ede.12463

Got milkweed? Genetic assimilation as potential source for the evolution of nonmigratory monarch butterfly wing shape

2023· article· en· W4388769353 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution & Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanausWingBiologyMonarch butterflyPhenotypic plasticityEcologyZoologyEvolutionary biologyLepidoptera genitalia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) are well studied for their annual long-distance migration from as far north as Canada to their overwintering grounds in Central Mexico. At the end of the cold season, monarchs start to repopulate North America through short-distance migration over the course of multiple generations. Interestingly, some populations in various tropical and subtropical islands do not migrate and exhibit heritable differences in wing shape and size, most likely an adaptation to island life. Less is known about forewing differences between long- and short-distance migrants in relation to island populations. Given their different migratory behaviors, we hypothesized that these differences would be reflected in wing morphology. To test this, we analyzed forewing shape and size of three different groups: nonmigratory, lesser migratory (migrate short-distances), and migratory (migrate long-distances) individuals. Significant differences in shape appear in all groups using geometric morphometrics. As variation found between migratory and lesser migrants has been shown to be caused by phenotypic plasticity, and lesser migrants develop intermediate forewing shapes between migratory and nonmigratory individuals, we suggest that genetic assimilation might be an important mechanism to explain the heritable variation found between migratory and nonmigratory populations. Additionally, our research confirms previous studies which show that forewing size is significantly smaller in nonmigratory populations when compared to both migratory phenotypes. Finally, we found sexual dimorphism in forewing shape in all three groups, but for size in nonmigratory populations only. This might have been caused by reduced constraints on forewing size in nonmigratory populations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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