The Middle Cambrian fossil Pikaia and the evolution of chordate swimming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conway Morris and Caron (2012) have recently published an account of virtually all the available information on Pikaia gracilens, a well-known Cambrian fossil and supposed basal chordate, and propose on this basis some new ideas about Pikaia's anatomy and evolutionary significance. Chief among its chordate-like features are the putative myomeres, a regular series of vertical bands that extends the length of the body. These differ from the myomeres of living chordates in that boundaries between them (the myosepta) are gently curved, with minimal overlap, whereas amphioxus and vertebrates have strongly overlapping V- and W-shaped myomeres. The implication, on biomechanical grounds, is that myomeres in Pikaia exerted much less tension on the myosepta, so the animal would have been incapable of swimming as rapidly as living chordates operating in the fast-twitch mode used for escape and attack. Pikaia either lacked the fast-twitch fibers necessary for such speeds, having instead only slow-twitch fibers, or it had an ancestral fiber type with functional capabilities more like modern slow fibers than fast ones. The first option is supported by the sequence of development in zebrafish, where both myoseptum formation and fast fiber deployment show a dependence on slow fibers, which develop first. For Pikaia, the absence of fast fibers has both behavioral and anatomical implications, which are discussed. Among the latter is the possibility that a notochord may not have been needed as a primary stiffening device if other structures (for example, the dorsal organ) could perform that role.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".