Understanding morphology: a comparative study on the lower jaw in two teleost species
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
Zebrafish are currently used as a model organism for studying disorders affecting bone development and regeneration, yet we do not understand many aspects of teleost skeletal biology. This study focuses on the changes in shape of Meckel’s cartilage and its subsequent ossification in two teleosts with different feeding strategies and jaw morphologies; zebrafish (Cypriniformes) which lack mandibular teeth and the sighted Mexican tetra (Characiformes), which has oral teeth. We find that some aspects of jaw development, such as the retraction of Meckel’s cartilage are delayed in the tetra despite its larger embryonic and adult size, while other aspects, such as the differentiation of mature chondrocytes is accelerated. The mode of retraction of Meckel’s cartilage also appears to be different in tetra compared to in zebrafish. Understanding the cellular and developmental mechanisms underlying jaw shape in species with different feeding strategies is important to our understanding of vertebrate morphology in general, and could provides novel insights into teleost skeletal biology.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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