A revision of the anatomy of the Early Devonian jawed vertebrate<i>Ptomacanthus anglicus</i>Miles
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The spine‐bearing jawed vertebrates (gnathostomes) assigned to the assemblage ‘Acanthodii’ play a key role in understanding the early evolution of osteichthyans and chondrichthyans. Amongst ‘acanthodians’, the genus Ptomacanthus has played a prominent role owing to its shark‐like tooth files. Recently described braincase material from this taxon contrasts strongly with the osteichthyan‐like braincase of Acanthodes , the only other ‘acanthodian’ for which this anatomy is well known. This seriously challenges acanthodian monophyly or at least the prevailing interpretation of Acanthodes . This study presents a redescription and updated comparison of the anatomy of Ptomacanthus based on unfigured material from the type and referred specimens, as well as adding new data on spine and scale histology. Ptomacanthus is remarkably heterosquamous compared to some other ‘acanthodians’. Further to its resemblances to Climatius , Ptomacanthus shares some features of the external morphology of its scales with the enigmatic genus Obtusacanthus . The scale crowns of Ptomacanthus exhibit both superpositional and areal growth. The bases, however, grow separately from the crown. As in Acanthodes , scales are here inferred to be added to the body from posterior to anterior. In spite of its chondrichthyan‐like form and characters, Ptomacanthus remains difficult to place on either the chondrichthyan, osteichthyan or gnathostome stem. Different placements each require invoking considerable character incongruence. Nevertheless, these new data from Ptomacanthus provide broader anatomical context for hard tissue characters commonly described on the basis of isolated remains.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it