Precise occlusion and trophic niche differentiation indicate specialized feeding in Early Devonian jawed vertebrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acanthodians may represent a paraphyletic assemblage of stem chondrichthyans, stem osteichthyans, stem gnathostomes, or some combination of the three. One of the difficulties in determining the phylogenetic affinities of this group of mostly small, spiny fishes is that several subgroups of acanthodians are represented by relatively little information in the fossil record. It is becoming increasingly apparent that to understand the evolution of gnathostomes, we must understand more about acanthodians. This study uses micro-computed tomography to test hypotheses about acanthodian jaw function, and in doing so provides insight into the form, function, and ecological role of ischnacanthiform acanthodian jaws and teeth from an extraordinary Early Devonian fossil locality in the Northwest Territories of Canada. The results of this study suggest that ischnacanthiform acanthodians may have coexisted by trophic niche differentiation, employing specialized feeding strategies during the Silurian and Early Devonian.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".