Ontogenetic and stratigraphic influence on observed phenotypic integration in the limb skeleton of a fossil tetrapod
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding morphological integration is one of the central goals of evolutionary developmental biology. Despite its applicability to questions of paleontological interest, there are few studies on integration in fossil vertebrates. In this study, we examine limb integration in the Lower Jurassic ichthyosaur Stenopterygius quadriscissus , with the aim of examining the effect of ontogeny and anagenetic changes over short geological time spans on metrics of limb integration. Both ontogenetic and stratigraphic effects had a significant influence on measured values of integration, the identity of strongly integrated elements, and some common ratio values such as the relative integration of the forelimb to the hind limb, or within-limb to between-limb integration. Ontogenetic effects were relatively greater, although this could be linked to sample size. Although adults showed the lowest levels of overall integration, they possessed high levels of integration between serially homologous elements, something that was unexpected due to strong divergence in limb size and perhaps functional differences in derived ichthyosaurs. Ontogenetic differences in the relative integration of the forelimb to the hind limb are probably related to early locomotor demands on the forelimb. We conclude that if samples are pooled, the resulting pattern of integration may not reflect any one subsample but will be a composite created through the superposition of several variables. Pooling data in paleontological studies of integration has a non-trivial effect on the results obtained.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".