Integration and modularity of teleostean pectoral fin shape and its role in the diversification of acanthomorph fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenotypic integration and modularity describe the strength and pattern of interdependencies between traits. Integration and modularity have been proposed to influence the trajectory of evolution, either acting as constraints or facilitators. Here, we examine trends in the integration and modularity of pectoral fin morphology in teleost fishes using geometric morphometrics. We compare the fin shapes of the highly diverse radiation of acanthomorph fishes to lower teleosts. Integration and modularity are measured using two-block partial least squares analysis and the covariance ratio coefficient between the radial bones and lepidotrichia of the pectoral fins. We show that the fins of acanthomorph fishes are more tightly integrated but also more morphologically diverse and faster evolving compared to nonacanthomorph fishes. The main pattern of shape covariation in nonacanthomorphs is concordant with the main trajectory of evolution between nonacanthomorphs and acanthomorphs. Our findings support a facilitating role for integration during the acanthomorph diversification. Potential functional consequences and developmental mechanisms of fin integration are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".