The evolution of aquatic feeding in seals: insights from <i>Enaliarctos</i> (Carnivora: Pinnipedimorpha), the oldest known seal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of pierce-feeding and loss of oral processing represented major adaptations for underwater feeding in marine mammals. We examined the evolution of pierce-feeding and its association with changes in tooth spacing and tooth size to determine whether pierce-feeding was practiced by the earliest known pinnipeds. Data on crown size and spacing in postcanine dentition were collected and 1) analysed by principal components analysis (PCA) to determine the tooth morphospace of arctoid carnivores, 2) analysed by least squares (LS) regression and phylogenetic independent contrasts (PIC) to determine what morphological variables were associated with increases in tooth spacing, and 3) used to reconstruct the evolution of feeding related traits within a phylogenetic context. The PCA analysis revealed that within arctoid carnivores, the greatest differences in morphospace were associated with pierce-feeding, and the early-diverging seal Enaliarctos was placed within the pinniped morphospace. Increased tooth spacing within Pinnipedia is a result of decreased postcanine crown size. When the evolution of dental characters is reconstructed, 'enaliarctines' were found to represent an intermediate stage in evolution between 'fissiped' and pinniped carnivores. They retained the limited tooth spacing of terrestrial carnivores, possessed postcanine crown lengths intermediate in size between pinnipeds and fissipeds, and possessed reduced heterodonty characteristic of crown pinnipeds. Our study indicated that pierce-feeding evolved early within pinnipeds. This suggested either that pierce-feeding evolved prior to the loss of mastication, or that pierce-feeding evolved at the same time as loss of mastication, and well before simplification of the dentition was completed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".