Squamosal ontogeny and variation in the pachycephalosaurian dinosaur <i>Stegoceras validum</i> Lambe, 1902, from the Dinosaur Park Formation, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pachycephalosaurian squamosal is one of the most diagnostic bones in this enigmatic group of dinosaurs, but little is known about variation in its morphology. Despite this, features of squamosal morphology are often used in diagnoses and phylogenetic studies. The recently proposed hypothesis of an ontogenetic transition from Dracorex to Pachycephalosaurus implies a large amount of ontogenetic variation in squamosal ornamentation that has not been well documented due to the small number of squamosals for these taxa. Stegoceras validum provides an important model for examining variation in squamosal morphology due to the large number of squamosals available. Here we examine the morphology of 14 S. validum squamosals both qualitatively and quantitatively. We find that although both node number and shape vary considerably, there is no clear ontogenetic pattern, which suggests a high degree of individual variation. The ornamental pattern, however, is maintained throughout the sample. Increase in node size is isometric for the enlarged medial node and normal posterior nodes, but negatively allometric for the vertex node. The squamosal bar is taller laterally than medially in nearly all specimens and increases in height with positive allometry at the same rate medially and laterally. We found no correlation between the width of the supratemporal fenestra on the squamosal and the size of the squamosal itself. Rather, this feature appears to exhibit a large degree of individual variation. Overall, these findings have implications for previous hypotheses of ontogenetic growth and function of the ornamentation, as well as the construction of phylogenetic characters.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".