Ontogenetic insights into the significance of mandibular corpus shape variation in hominoids: Developmental covariation between M<sub>2</sub> crypt formation and corpus shape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives Here, we quantify and compare the cross‐sectional shape of the mandibular corpus between M1 and M2 during growth in Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, and Pongo pygmaeus. The goal is to assess the hypothesis that the shape of the corpus is influenced by the development of permanent molars in their crypts, by examining ontogenetic changes in corpus shape and investigating covariation between corpus shape and M2 and M3 molar crypt forms. Materials and Methods Ontogenetic changes in mandibular corpus shape were assessed using landmarks and semilandmarks, and measurements of length, width, and height were used to quantify molar crypts (M2 and M3). Ontogenetic changes in corpus growth from the eruption of M1 to the eruption of M3 were evaluated for each species through generalized Procrustes analysis and principal components analysis in shape–space and form–space. The relationship between corpus shape and molar crypt form was investigated at three different developmental stages using two‐block partial least squares (2B‐PLS) analysis. Results The results show clear differences in growth patterns among all three species and provide evidence that species‐level differences in mandibular corpus growth occur prior to the emergence of M1. The results of the 2B‐PLS analysis reveal that significant covariance between corpus shape and molar crypt form is limited to the developmental stage marked by the emergence of M1, with covariance between corpus shape and M2 crypt width. Corpora that are relatively narrower in the inferior portion of the cross section covary with relatively narrower M2 crypts. Conclusions These results have important implications for understanding the taxonomic and phylogenetic significance of mandibular corpus shape variation in the hominoid fossil record.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".