MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The braincase of the chondrichthyan<i>Doliodus</i>from the Lower Devonian Campbellton Formation of New Brunswick, Canada

2009· article· en· W1990340140 on OpenAlexaffabout
John G. Maisey, Randall F. Miller, Susan Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Zoologica · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevonianBiologyAnatomyElasmobranchiiPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The braincase of the late Lower Devonian (Emsian) chondrichthyan Doliodus is described for the first time. Its postorbital process is extended ventrally and probably enclosed part of the infraorbital sensory canal, as in some placoderms. Doliodus has a shark‐like dentition, but its upper anterior tooth files were supported by the internasal cartilage of the braincase, not by the palatoquadrates. Modern selachian jaws and dentitions are not representative of primitive crown‐group gnathostomes because they display a mixture of conserved and derived character states. Separation of the palatoquadrates by the internasal cartilage is probably a primitive condition for crown‐group gnathostomes. Continuity of the upper dental arcade across the ethmoid region may represent a synapomorphy of chondrichthyans and some acanthodians (the condition is not found in placoderms or osteichthyans). Exclusion of the arcade from the ethmoid region is probably apomorphic within elasmobranchs. Doliodus has curious bar‐like, paired subcranial ridges ending posteriorly at the hyomandibular articulation. These superficially resemble visceral arch infrapharyngohyals fused to the floor of the braincase, adding circumstantial palaeontological support to the old proposal that parts of visceral arches may be incorporated into the gnathostome braincase, although it seems more plausible that they formed in the lateral margins of the embryonic parachordal or hypotic lamina.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa ZoologicaSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207