Developmental mechanisms underlying differential claw expression in the autopodia of geckos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The limb and autopodium are frequently employed to study pattern formation during embryonic development, providing insights into how cells give rise to complex anatomical structures. With regard to the differentiation of structures at the distal tips of digits, geckos constitute an attractive clade, because within their ranks they exhibit multiple independent occurrences of claw loss and reduction, these being linked to the development of adhesive pads. The developmental patterns that lead to claw loss, however, remain undescribed. Among geckos, Tarentola is a genus characterized by large claws on digits III and IV of the manus and pes, with digits I, II, and V bearing only vestigial claws, or lacking them entirely. The variable expression of claws on different digits provides the opportunity to investigate the processes leading to claw reduction and loss within a single species. RESULTS: Here, we document the embryonic developmental dynamics that lead to this intraspecifically variable pattern, focusing on the cellular processes of proliferation and cell death. We find that claws initially develop on all digits of all autopodia, but, later in development, those of digits I, II, and V regress, leading to the adult condition in which robust claws are evident only on digits III and IV. Early apoptotic activity at the digit tips, followed by apoptosis of the claw primordium, premature ossification of the terminal phalanges, and later differential proliferative activity are collectively responsible for claw regression in particular digits. CONCLUSIONS: Claw reduction and loss in Tarentola result from differential intensities of apoptosis and cellular proliferation in different digits, and these processes have already had some effect before visible signs of claw development are evident. The differential processes persist through later developmental stages. Variable expression of iteratively homologous structures between digits within autopodia makes claw reduction and loss in Tarentola an excellent vehicle for exploring the developmental mechanisms that lead to evolutionary reduction and loss of structures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".