Ultrasound and ultraviolet: crypsis in gliding mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gliding is only present in six extant groups of mammals-interestingly, despite divergent evolutionary histories, all mammalian gliders are strictly nocturnal. Gliding mammals also seem to have relatively high rates of ultrasound use and ultraviolet-induced photoluminescence (UVP) in contrast with their close relatives. Therefore, we hypothesized that, despite diverging lineages, gliding mammals use similar modes of cryptic communication compared to their non-gliding counterparts. We developed two datasets containing the vocal range (minimum-maximum of the dominant harmonic; kHz) and UVP of 73 and 82 species, respectively; we report four novel vocal repertoires and 57 novel observations of the presence or absence of UVP. We complemented these datasets with information about body size, diel activity patterns, habitat openness, and sociality to explore possible covariates related to vocal production and UVP. We found that the maximum of the dominant harmonic was significant higher in gliding mammals when vocalizing than their non-gliding relatives. Additionally, we found that nocturnality was the only significant predictor of UVP, consistent with the previous hypothesis that luminophores primarily drive UVP in mammal fur. In contrast, however, we did not find UVP ubiquitous in nocturnal mammals, suggesting that some unknown process may contribute to variation in this trait.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | high |
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".