PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF REPRODUCTIVE TRAITS OF MANIRAPTORAN THEROPODS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR EGG PARATAXONOMY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: A phylogenetic analysis of reproductive and oological (egg) traits of theropod taxa allows determination of the sequence in which these traits evolved in Theropoda. Our results indicate that several avian reproductive traits, such as adults sitting on eggs, asymmetrical eggs, unornamented eggshell surface, and complex eggshell ultrastructure, were already present in non‐avian maniraptorans, and could have evolved in more basal theropods. In addition, non‐avian maniraptorans laid two eggs at a time and orientated their eggs subvertically or subhorizontally in their nests, features not retained by neornithine birds. Based on our cladistic analysis it is also possible to infer the phylogenetic affinity of ootaxa of unknown parentage: Protoceratopsidovum was laid by a maniraptoran more derived than oviraptorids, and Parvoolithus probably belonged to a Cretaceous bird. Finally, our analysis reveals that many of the high‐level categories of egg parataxonomy (morphotypes and basic types) are unnatural groupings (i.e. non‐monophyletic). We recommend that these high‐level categories be abandoned because oofamilies are sufficient to categorize egg taxa.
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) | 0.002 | 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".