MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Morphology and Histology of Lattice‐like Ossified Epaxial Tendons in<i>Psittacosaurus</i>(Dinosauria: Ceratopsia)

2010· article· en· W2150546690 on OpenAlexaff
Chang‐Fu Zhou, Ke‐Qin Gao, Richard C. Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Geologica Sinica - English Edition · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOssificationBiologyQuadrupedalismAnatomyTendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Epaxial tendons play an important role in the study of the musculoskeletal system and locomotory style of dinosaurs. Although the ossified epaxial tendon lattice is fairly well known in Iguanodontoidea, only recently has knowledge of this complex been extended to ceratopsians. This study concerns the gross morphology and microstructure of the tendon lattice in Psittacosaurus , a basal ceratopsian. As in the neoceratopsian Chasmosaurus , the ossified tendons of Psittacosaurus form a three‐layered, lattice‐like structure. The microstructure of the tendons in large psittacosaur individuals retains an early stage of ossification, as in juvenile birds and nestling hadrosaurs, suggesting a slow developmental rate of ossification of the tendons in psittacosaur ontogeny. Comparative study indicates that a lattice‐like arrangement of three‐layered epaxial tendons is widely distributed in Cerapoda. This pattern also extends to Ankylosauria, implying a similar pattern of the epaxial muscles through the ornithischian clade. In addition, comparison with crocodiles implies that the different morphology of ossified tendons in dinosaurs may be associated with adaptive aspects of their paleobiology, not simply a side effect of skeletal ossification. In contrast to the short tendons in quadrupedal Chasmosaurus and Protoceratops , the elongated tendons in Psittacosaurus may be related to the bipedal locomotion characteristic of this taxon.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Geologica Sinica - English EditionSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207