MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995121290 · doi:10.18435/vamp29357

A morphological study of vertebral centra in extant species of pike, Esox (Teleostei: Esociformes)

2019· article· en· W2995121290 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sinjini Sinha, Donald B. Brinkman, Alison M. Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueVertebrate Anatomy Morphology Palaeontology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Tyrrell MuseumUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPikeEsoxCretaceousGenusTeleosteiBiologyPaleontologyVertebrateZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Isolated centra of members of the Esocidae occur frequently in vertebrate microfossil localities of Late Cretaceous and early Paleocene age and are an important source of data on the early history of the family. However, morphological variation along the vertebral column can lead to incorrect interpretations of diversity if they are not recognized. To facilitate the use of centra for interpreting the diversity and distribution of esocids in Cretaceous vertebrate microfossil localities, the variation along the column in five extant species of esocids is described. Comparison with Cretaceous centra referred to the Esocidae allows identification of a series of features in which species of Esox differ from basal members of the family. These include the presence of a mid-ventral groove bordered by a pair of low budges on centra in the anterior end of the column, and antero-lateral processes on the posterior abdominal and anterior caudal centra. These differences provide a basis for recognizing early occurrences of the genus Esox in the fossil record and thus will allow centra to be used to document the timing of origin of the genus.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertebrate Anatomy Morphology PalaeontologySame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207