Cartilage is a metazoan tissue; integrating data from nonvertebrate sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Connective tissues are responsible for much of the variation in morphology that we see today. Cartilage is a type of connective tissue that is often considered to be restricted to vertebrates, however, cartilaginous tissues are also found within invertebrates. Unfortunately, most definitions and classification schemes for cartilages suffer from a strong vertebrate bias, severely hampering the efforts of those who have attempted to include invertebrate tissues as cartilage. To encompass all types of cartilage, current classification systems need to be expanded. Here we present vesicular cell‐rich as a new cartilage classification. Invertebrate cartilages, comparable to vertebrate cartilages at both cell and tissue levels, are composed of similar molecules, yet the extent to which they may be homologous is unknown. One option for studying the evolution of tissues is to adopt molecular phylogenetic approaches. However, the paucity of published molecular data makes addressing the evolution of cartilage using molecular phylogenetic approaches unrealistic at this time. Cartilage likely evolved from a chondroid connective tissue precursor, and may have been independently derived many times. The appearance of cartilaginous tissues of unknown phylogenetic affinities in such a wide diversity of animal groups warrants further investigation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".