MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094073165 · doi:10.1016/j.crpv.2011.03.008

“Lungs” in Placoderms, a persistent palaeobiological myth related to environmental preconceived interpretations

2011· article· en· W2094073165 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComptes Rendus Palevol · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevonianTheriaLate Devonian extinctionHumanitiesPaleontologyGeologyBiologyPhilosophyPhanerozoicCarboniferousCenozoic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of an aerial breathing organ in Placoderms is noticed in many textbooks on the history of breathing in Vertebrates. The origin of this interpretation is from a paper published in 1941 dealing with the interpretation of the differential sedimentary infilling of the armour of the antiarch Bothriolepis canadensis from the Late Devonian Escuminac formation of Canada. A revision of this material shows that if some sedimentary structures could be interpreted as traces of some digestive organs, none could be interpreted as putative lungs. The original proposal was based mainly on a presupposed mode of life of Bothriolepis in a freshwater environment of an alluvial plain. Recent studies of the Escuminac Formation environment conclude that it represents a marginal marine environment. Moreover, Bothriolepis has a worldwide distribution, notably in strictly marine environment. Thus, the presence of lungs in Bothriolepis remains highly questionable: it cannot be supported by anatomical, phylogenetic, nor biological arguments. La présence d’un organe respiratoire aérien chez les Placodermes est mentionnée dans nombre d’ouvrages généraux sur l’histoire de la respiration chez les vertébrés. La source de cette question se trouve dans un article de 1941, consacré à l’interprétation du remplissage sédimentaire de la carapace de l’antiarche Bothriolepis canadensis de la formation d’Escuminac. La révision de ce matériel montre que, s’il est possible d’interpréter certains remplissages comme une substitution possible des organes viscéraux digestifs, rien n’indique la présence d’organes pouvant représenter des poumons. L’interprétation proposée à l’époque reposait principalement sur un mode de vie présupposé de l’animal dans un environnement d’eau douce de plaine alluviale. Des études récentes de l’environnement de la formation d’Escuminac concluent à un milieu marin côtier. De plus, le genre Bothriolepis a une distribution mondiale, notamment dans de nombreux environnements marins francs. Morphologiquement non vérifiable, la présence de poumons chez Bothriolepis n’est soutenable, ni phylogénétiquement, ni biologiquement.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it