The emergence of the chordate body plan: some puzzles and problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lacalli, T.C. 2010. The emergence of the chordate body plan: some puzzles and problems. — Acta Zoologica (Stockholm) 91 : 4–10 Rather than being sessile filter feeders, ancestral chordates are now thought to have evolved from more active benthic animals, possibly hemichordate‐like, that took to swimming, to generate something resembling modern amphioxus. This general picture conceals a number of specific problems that underline how little we understand the transition in detail. I will address three. First, and closest to resolution is the issue of dorsoventral inversion, which has implications for understanding how an internalized brain evolved. This is because the mouth, dorsal after inversion, has first to be moved out of the way. Its migration down the left side of the head during amphioxus development may be a recapitulation of this event. Two other puzzles, both further from resolution are: (1) the significance, if any, of the neurenteric canal, which may be telling us something important about the true nature of deuterostomy, specifically whether hemichordates and echinoderms are deuterostomes for a different reason than chordates, and (2) whether the functional digestive tract of chordates is a secondary replacement of an earlier structure whose fate remains unexplained. Resolving these latter two issues will require a better understanding of molecular level events during development in protochordates and their immediate invertebrate relatives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".