Patterns of growth in the presacral vertebral column of the leopard gecko (<i>Eublepharis macularius</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postnatal growth patterns within the vertebral column may be informative about body proportions and regionalization. We measured femur length, lengths of all pre-sacral vertebrae, and lengths of intervertebral spaces, from radiographs of a series of 21 Eublepharis macularius, raised under standard conditions and covering most of the ontogenetic body size range. Vertebrae were grouped into cervical, sternal, and dorsal compartments, and lengths of adjacent pairs of vertebrae were summed before analysis. Femur length was included as an index of body size. Principal component analysis of the variance-covariance matrix of these data was used to investigate scaling among them. PC1 explained 94.19% of total variance, interpreted as the variance due to body size. PC1 differed significantly from the hypothetical isometric vector, indicating overall allometry. The atlas and axis vertebrae displayed strong negative allometry; the remainder of the vertebral pairs exhibited weak negative allometry, isometry or positive allometry. PC1 explained a markedly smaller amount of variance for the vertebral pairs of the cervical compartment than for the remainder of the vertebral pairs, with the exception of the final pair. The relative standard deviations of the eigenvalues from the PCAs of the three vertebral compartments indicated that the vertebrae of the cervical compartment were less strongly integrated by scaling than were the sternal or dorsal vertebrae, which did not differ greatly between themselves in their strong integration, suggesting that the growth of the cervical vertebrae is constrained by the mechanical requirements of the head. Regionalization of the remainder of the vertebral column is less clearly defined but may be associated with wave form propagation incident upon locomotion, and by locomotory changes occasioned by tail autotomy and regeneration. Femur length exhibits negative allometry relative to individual vertebral pairs and to vertebral column length, suggesting a change in locomotor requirements over the ontogenetic size range.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".