MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985690728 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.24262

Divergence of craniofacial developmental trajectories among avian embryos

2015· article· en· W1985690728 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyEvolvabilityHeterochronyEvolutionary biologyDivergence (linguistics)MorphometricsEvolutionary developmental biologyQuailZoologyCraniofacialOntogenyAnatomyGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Morphological divergence among related species involves changes to developmental processes. When such variation arises in development has garnered considerable theoretical interest relating to the broader issue of how development may constrain evolutionary change. The hourglass model holds that while early developmental events may be highly evolvable, there is a phylotypic stage when key developmental events are conserved. Thus, evolutionary divergence among related species should tend to arise after such a stage of reduced evolvability and, consequently, reduced variation among species. We test this prediction by comparing developmental trajectories among three avian species of varying relatedness (chick, quail, and duck) to locate their putative point of divergence. Three-dimensional geometric morphometrics and trajectory analyses were used to measure the significance of the facial shape variation observed among these species. RESULTS: Duck embryos, being more distantly related, differed from the more closely-related chick and quail embryos in the enlargement of their frontonasal prominences. Phenotypic trajectory analyses demonstrated divergence of the three species, most notably, duck. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the two more closely related species share similar facial morphologies for a longer time during development, while ducks diverge. This suggests a surprising lability of craniofacial development during early face formation. Developmental Dynamics 244:1158-1167, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.224 · 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