The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Sexual dimorphism of head size in Gallotia galloti: testing the niche divergence hypothesis by functional analyses
Open accessAbstract
1. Two often cited hypotheses explaining sexual head size dimorphism in lizards are: sexual selection acting on structures important in intrasexual competition, and reduction of intersexual competition through food niche separation. 2. In this study some implicit assumptions of the latter hypothesis were tested, namely that an increase in gape distance and bite force should accompany the observed increase in head size. These assumptions are tested by recording bite forces, in vivo, for lizards of the species Gallotia galloti. In this species, male lizards have significantly larger heads than female conspecifics of similar snout–vent length. 3. Additionally, the average force needed to crush several potential prey species was determined experimentally and compared with the bite force data. This comparison clearly illustrates that animals of both sexes can bite much harder than required for most insect food items, which does not support the niche divergence hypothesis. The apparent ‘excess’ bite force in both sexes might be related to the partially herbivorous diet of the animals. 4. To unravel the origin of differences between sexes in bite capacity, the crushing phase of biting was modelled. The results of this model show different strategies in allocation of muscle tissue between both sexes. The origin of this difference is discussed and a possible evolutionary pathway of the development of the sexual dimorphism in the species is provided.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The implications of food hardness for diet in bats
Aguirre, L. F., Herrel, A., Van Damme, R., & MatThysen, E. (2003) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.2003.00721.x · Cited by 276
Self-citationThe ontogeny of bite‐force performance in American alligator ( Alligator mississippiensis )
Erickson, G. M., Lappin, A. K., & Vliet, K. A. (2003) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1017/s0952836903003819 · Cited by 255
Sexual size dimorphism in birds
Székely, T., Lislevand, T., & Figuerola, J. (2007) · Sex, Size and Gender Roles · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199208784.003.0004 · Cited by 160
Metadata
- Authors
- Herrel, A., Spithoven, L., Van Damme, R., & DE Vree, F.
- Venue
- Functional Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 289-297
- ISSN
- 0269-8463 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2435
- OpenAlex
- W1982327380
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sexual dimorphism of head size in Gallotia galloti: testing the niche divergence hypothesis by functional analyses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2435.1999.00305.x
- The paper
- Herrel, A., Spithoven, L., Van Damme, R., & DE Vree, F. (1999). Sexual dimorphism of head size in Gallotia galloti: testing the niche divergence hypothesis by functional analyses. Functional Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2435.1999.00305.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.