MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978155738 · doi:10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz098

The homologies and evolutionary reduction of the pelvis and hindlimbs in snakes, with the first report of ossified pelvic vestiges in an anomalepidid (Liotyphlops beui)

2019· article· en· W2978155738 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Palci, Mark N. Hutchinson, Michael W. Caldwell, Krister T. Smith, Michael S. Y. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueZoological Journal of the Linnean Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsBiologyAnatomyPelvic girdlePelvisIschium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report the first example of ossified pelvic vestiges in an anomalepidid snake, Liotyplophs beui, and provide a review of the diversity of limb and pelvic elements within Serpentes. We trace the evolution, homology and reduction of the pelvic elements and hindlimbs from the oldest known snakes through to living forms. Evolutionary analysis of the pelvic and limb data shows that the most recent common ancestor of all living snakes (Serpentes) most probably retained all three pelvic elements and rudimentary hindlimbs (femoral spurs). Subsequently, there have been multiple losses of ossified pelvic and hindlimb elements and regaining of ossified pelvic elements. Reduction of the pelvis has followed different routes in the two primary groups of living snakes (scolecophidians and alethinophidians). The single remaining rod-like element in some scolecophidians is the ischium, whereas the single remaining rod-like element in many basal alethinophidians is the pubis. Notably, many basal alethinophidians share a distinctive configuration of cloacal spur (claw), femur and a sizeable pubis, which is likely to be related functionally to the widespread use of the hindlimbs in mating and courtship, rather than the usual representation of the bones as non-functional vestiges.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoological Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207