MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of the nervous system in hatchlings of Spadella cephaloptera (Chaetognatha), and implications for nervous system evolution in Bilateria

2011· article· en· W1568078569 on OpenAlexaff
Verena Rieger, Carsten H. G. Müller, Thurston C. Lacalli, Bill S. Hansson, Steffen Harzsch

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Growth & Differentiation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiologyBilateriaNervous systemNeurogenesisDeuterostomeVentral nerve cordEvolutionary biologyNeuroscienceChordateZoologyNeural developmentAnatomyPhylogenetic treeVertebrate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chaetognaths (arrow worms) play an important role as predators in planktonic food webs. Their phylogenetic position is unresolved, and among the numerous hypotheses, affinities to both protostomes and deuterostomes have been suggested. Many aspects of their life history, including ontogenesis, are poorly understood and, though some aspects of their embryonic and postembryonic development have been described, knowledge of early neural development is still limited. This study sets out to provide new insights into neurogenesis of newly hatched Spadella cephaloptera and their development during the following days, with attention to the two main nervous centers, the brain and the ventral nerve center. These were examined with immunohistological methods and confocal laser-scan microscopic analysis, using antibodies against tubulin, FMRFamide, and synapsin to trace the emergence of neuropils and the establishment of specific peptidergic subsystems. At hatching, the neuronal architecture of the ventral nerve center is already well established, whereas the brain and the associated vestibular ganglia are still rudimentary. The development of the brain proceeds rapidly over the next 6 days to a state that resembles the adult pattern. These data are discussed in relation to the larval life style and behaviors such as feeding. In addition, we compare the larval chaetognath nervous system and that of other bilaterian taxa in order to extract information with phylogenetic value. We conclude that larval neurogenesis in chaetognaths does not suggest an especially close relationship to either deuterostomes or protostomes, but instead displays many apomorphic features.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations42
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment Growth & DifferentiationSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207