Size matters: the effects of ontogenetic disparity on the phylogeny of Trematopidae (Amphibia: Temnospondyli)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Trematopids are a clade of terrestrial Permo-Carboniferous temnospondyl amphibians. The intrarelationships of this clade are poorly known. This is largely attributable to a substantial disparity in size between type specimens, which range from the small-bodied lectotype of Mattauschia laticeps (< 4 cm skull length) to the large-bodied holotype of Acheloma cumminsi (> 15 cm skull length). Inferred correlation of size disparity with ontogenetic disparity has led previous workers either to omit taxa in phylogenetic analyses or to forgo an analysis altogether. Here, I take a specimen-level approach and multiple subsampling permutations to explore the phylogeny of the Trematopidae as a case study for assessing the effects of ontogenetic disparity on phylogenetic reconstruction in temnospondyls. The various analyses provide evidence that ontogenetic disparity confounds the phylogenetic inference of trematopids but without a directional bias. Tree topologies of most permutations are poorly resolved and weakly supported, reflecting character conflict that results from the inability of the analyses to differentiate retained plesiomorphies from juvenile features. These findings urge caution in the interpretation of phylogenetic analyses for which ontogenetic disparity exists, but is unaccounted for, and provide a strong impetus for more directed exploration of the interplay of ontogeny and phylogeny across Temnospondyli.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".