Lamella and scansor numbers in Thecadactylus rapicauda (Gekkonidae): Patterns revealed through correlational analysis and implications for systematic and functional studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many taxa of lizards bear transversely enlarged subdigital scales that are often a source of systematic characters.Among gekkonid and polychrotid lizards, elaborations of such scales, called lamellae and scansors, are employed in adhesive locomotion (Colette, 1961;Hiller, 1968;Russell, 1975).Subdigital lamellae and scansors are derivatives of scales, the form, shape and number of which are thought to re ect function (Russell, 1981) as well as indicate patterns of relationship (Couper et al.; 1993I Raxworthy andNussbaum, 1993;Grismer et al.;1994/.While lamellae in the loose sense encompass all subdigital scales that are transversely enlarged, they can be divided into two subsets ( g. 1): scansors, the distal lamellae most closely involved in adhesion and therefore occurring on the hyperextensible portion of a digit (Russell, 1981(Russell, , 1986)); and basal lamellae, which differ morphologically from scansors (Russell, 1981), and are situated more proximally.Scale patterns in squamates are generally regarded as being genetically determined and discrete (Hecht, 1952).Counts of total lamellae feature in both systematic (Grismer et al.; 1994, etc.) and functional (Hecht, 1952; Peterson, 1983a, b; Mayer in Losos, 1990;Glossip and Losos, 1997) studies.Numbers of total lamellae vary both within and between digits and, as a consequence, most authors choose to count these structures on a smaller set of digits, on the assumption
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".