Variability in the growth patterns of the cornified claw sheath among vertebrates: implications for using biogeochemistry to study animal movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We review the role of biogeochemical signatures, such as stable isotopes and trace elements, in the cornified claw tissue as a means of studying movement and foraging behaviour of vertebrates because this approach is noninvasive and can capture contemporary and historic signatures. Because biogeochemical techniques are still relatively new in studies of animal movement, we are only beginning to understand how the growth patterns of the cornified claw sheath may affect our ability to interpret the biogeochemical signals in these tissues. To move towards resolving this, we review the morphology of the epidermal cornified claw sheath in several taxa that illustrate substantial variation in growth patterns both between taxa and between individual distinct claw regions. For instance, in mammalian claws, deposition of keratinizing cells from the epidermis is nonlinear because the claw tip is composed of old and new cornified epidermal cells, whereas the cornified blade horn covering the claw’s lateral walls is deposited continuously and without assortment, providing unbroken time-series data. We also consider patterns of growth in mammalian hooves, as well as reptilian, avian, and amphibian cornified claw sheaths, and address the need for expanded research in this field. We conclude this synthesis by describing a noninvasive technique for monitoring growth rates in a model mammal, the American badger ( Taxidea taxus (Schreber, 1777)), and provide guidelines for future sampling of claw keratin, which will improve our ability to back-calculate the time of biogeochemical integration into this tissue.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".