How do gastropods grow synchronized shell sculpture? Effect of experimental varix manipulations on shell growth by<i>Ceratostoma foliatum</i>(Muricidae: Ocenebrinae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gastropod shells display striking patterns in both color and sculpture, but rather little is known about the developmental mechanisms that produce those patterns. Here, we tested a physical feedback hypothesis for how snails control spatial patterning of shell sculpture. Varices—a form of synchronized, blade‐like axial sculpture—are produced at regular intervals around the shell and often aligned closely between adjacent whorls. Older varices were believed to provide a spatial cue about where to position a new varix. To test this hypothesis, we manipulated physical cues by cutting off varices or attaching new ones to the body whorl of individuals of Ceratostoma foliatum , and then allowing snails to grow a new varix. We found that previous varices on the shell were neither necessary nor sufficient to induce a new varix at a particular location. However, the position of older varices did appear to affect the fine tuning of subsequent varix placement. The results of our experiments therefore suggest that varix synchrony arises mainly from some internal mechanism that yields a standardized amount of spiral growth per growth spurt. We also found that shell damage can induce varix production in unusual or aberrant locations during subsequent shell growth.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".