MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168448992 · doi:10.1002/jmor.10146

Patterns of ossification in the manus of the harbor porpoise (<i>Phocoena phocoena</i>): Hyperphalangy and delta‐shaped bones

2003· article· en· W2168448992 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Morphology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorpoiseBiologyAnatomyPhocoenaOssificationManusPolydactylyPhalanxNumerical digit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the transition from terrestrial to aquatic habitats, cetacean forelimbs have undergone significant modifications in bone morphology and soft tissue distribution. Some, but not all, of these modifications are also demonstrated in other lineages of extant and extinct secondarily aquatic tetrapods. This study examines the ontogenetic pattern of ossification of the manus of the harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), using plain film radiography. Two modifications examined are hyperphalangy (number of phalanges per digit increased beyond the typical mammalian number) and the morphology of delta-shaped bones. Hyperphalangy in Phocoena phocoena is apparent in digits 2 and 3. Phalangeal counts in all digits are variable (sometimes between the right and left flippers of the same individual) and are not necessarily correlated with age. Phalangeal ossification and epiphyseal fusion proceeds along the proximo-distal axis within each digit. In addition, digits 2 and 3 are at a more advanced stage of ossification than more abaxial digits. Delta-shaped bones appear to be a normal stage in the ossification of phalanges in all digits except the third, and may persist in the adult in certain digits. In humans, this morphology is a developmental anomaly usually associated with other malformations, such as polydactyly or syndactyly. Delta-shaped bones in the cetacean manus display a consistent orientation and the process by which they are formed may be similar to that in extinct marine reptiles.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations20
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MorphologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207