Anatomical features of <i>Leiopelma</i> embryos and larvae: Implications for anuran evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A controversial issue in anuran systematics is the relationship of Leiopelma to other anurans because recent phylogenetic constructions imply different relationships among the basal frogs. Of particular evolutionary interest is whether early development of Leiopelma resembles an ancestral salamander-like larva, an anuran tadpole, or neither. In the 1950s, Neville G. Stephenson hypothesized that direct development is the primary mode of development in amphibians, based on the fact that Leiopelma spp. lack a free-living (=feeding) larval stage. Although this hypothesis has not been generally accepted, it has not been formally refuted. We review Stephenson's work on Leiopelma and examine the anatomy of embryos/"larvae" of the four extant Leiopelma species for evidence of vestigial larval features that might refute the "direct-developing ancestor" hypothesis. We describe internal oral features in early developmental stages of Leiopelma and compare Leiopelma with a closely related basal anuran, Ascaphus, to assess whether their early developmental stages share any derived features. In Leiopelma hochstetteri, embryos/larvae have open gill slits and some faint rugosities around one gill slit that may be vestiges of gill rakers or filters. They also have more intestinal loops, indicative of an elongated alimentary tract, at earlier rather than late embryonic/larval stages. Collectively, these features support the view that the ancestor of Leiopelma had a free-swimming, free-feeding, aquatic larva. The palatoquadrate of Leiopelma archeyi reorients approximately 40 degrees from a more horizontal to a more vertical position through embryonic/"larval" development. This amount of cranial remodeling is intermediate between that seen in salamanders (17-27 degrees) and that reported for Ascaphus (64 degrees ) and other basal frogs (71-78 degrees) at metamorphosis. We found no internal oral features that Leiopelma shares specifically with Ascaphus. However, Leiopelma embryos have a ventrally positioned mouth and a downturned rostrum, characteristic of Ascaphus and other stream-adapted tadpoles.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".