MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7101147611

ORI GIN AL PA PER Baculum variation and allometry in the muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus): a case for sexual selection

2015· article· en· W7101147611 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllometrySexual selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Stabilizing selectionSexual dimorphismVariation (astronomy)HeritabilitySexual maturity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sexual selection is a powerful force that influences the evolution of a variety of traits associated with female mate choice and male–male competition. Although other factors have been implicated, sexual selection may be particularly important in the evo-lution of the genitalia. Traits under sexual selection typically have high phenotypic variance and positive allometry relative to non-sexual traits. Here, we test the hypothesis that the baculum (os penis) of the muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) is under sexual selection by examining phenotypic variance and allometry relative to non-sexual traits. Muskrats were sampled from Ontario, Canada, and a variety of traits measured. Measurements included baculum length and width, and three non-sexual traits (skull length, skull width, hind foot length). We used coefficient of variation (CV) and allometric slopes calculated using reduced major axis regression to test our hypotheses. Baculum traits had significantly higher CV’s relative to non-sexual traits. Baculum traits also showed positive allometry, whereas all non-sexual traits had negative allometric relationships. In addition, baculum width had higher CV’s and steeper allometric slopes than baculum length, indicating that, in muskrat, baculum width may be more influenced by sexual selection than baculum

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→