Patristic evolutionary rates suggest a punctuated pattern in forelimb evolution before and after the origin of birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of powered flight has traditionally been associated with the origin of birds, the most successful clade of modern tetrapods, as exemplified by the nearly 10,000 species alive today. Flight requires a suite of morphological changes to skeletal anatomy to create a light yet resistant framework for an airfoil and advanced nervous motor control. Given the level of morphological integration necessary to create a suitable aerofoil, the origin of flight may be intuitively assumed to be coupled with high evolutionary rates of wing-related morphologies. Here we show that the origin of birds is associated with little or no evolutionary change to the skeletal anatomy of the forelimb, and thus Archaeopteryx is unlikely to be the “Rosetta Stone” for the origin of flight it was once believed to be. Using comparative statistics and time-series analyses on a data set constructed from all known forelimb skeletal anatomy of non-avian theropod dinosaurs and a diverse assemblage of early birds, we demonstrate three focused peaks of rapid forelimb evolution at Tetanurae, Eumaniraptora, and Ornithothoraces. The peaks are not associated with missing data and remain stable under multiple perturbations to the phylogenetic arrangements. Different regions of the forelimbs are demonstrated to have undergone asynchronous periods of evolutionary peaks and stasis. Our results evince a more complicated stepwise mode of forelimb evolution before and after the origin of Aves than previously supposed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".