MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910679636 · doi:10.5061/dryad.3j9kd51g8

Relationships of song structure to phylogenetic history, habitat, and morphology in the vireos, greenlets, and allies (Passeriformes: Vireonidae)

2020· dataset· en· W6910679636 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhylogenetic treeMorphology (biology)PhylogeneticsPhylogenetic comparative methodsPhylogenetic relationshipVariation (astronomy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic signals show immense variation among passerines, and several hypotheses have been proposed to explain this diversity. In this study, we tested, for the first time, the relationships of song structure to phylogeny, habitat type, and morphology in the vireos and allies (Vireonidae). Every measure of song structure considered in this study had moderate and significant phylogenetic signal. Furthermore, two song-constraining morphological traits, bill shape and body mass, also exhibited significant phylogenetic signal. Song length showed the largest within-clade similarity; longer songs were highly conserved in part of the greenlet (Hylophilus) clade, whereas shorter songs characterized the remaining seven genera. We found no differences in song structure among vireonids living in different habitat types. However, vireonids with shorter, stouter bills and larger bodies sang songs with lower minimum and maximum peak frequency, compared with species with longer, thinner bills and smaller bodies. We conclude that Vireonidae song evolution is driven partially by phylogenetically conserved morphological traits. Our findings support the phylogenetic signal and morphological constraints hypotheses explaining structural diversity in avian acoustic signals.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADFrench-language works237,207