Limb ossification in the Paleozoic branchiosaurid <i>Apateon</i> (Temnospondyli) and the early evolution of preaxial dominance in tetrapod limb development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the wide range of shapes and sizes that accompany a vast variety of functions, the development of tetrapod limbs follows a conservative pattern of de novo condensation, branching, and segmentation. Development of the zeugopodium and digital arch typically occurs in a posterior to anterior sequence, referred to as postaxial dominance, with a digital sequence of 4-3-5-2-1. The only exception to this pattern in all of living Tetrapoda can be found in salamanders, which display a preaxial dominance in limb development, a de novo condensation of a basale commune (distal carpal/tarsal 1+2) and a precoccial development of digits I and II. These divergent patterns have puzzled researchers for over a century leading to various explanatory hypotheses. Despite many advances in research on tetrapod limb development, the divergent evolution of these two pathways and its causes are still not understood. Based on an extensive ontogenetic series we investigated the pattern of limb development of the 300 Ma old branchiosaurid amphibian Apateon. This revealed a preaxial dominance in limb development that was previously believed to be unique and derived for modern salamanders. The Branchiosauridae are favored as close relatives of extant salamanders in most phylogenetic hypotheses of the highly controversial origins and relationships of extant amphibians. The findings provide new insights into the evolution of developmental pathways in tetrapod limb development, the relationships of modern amphibians with possible Paleozoic antecedents, and their initial timing of divergence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".