Fish without Tail Fins—Exploring the Function of Tail Morphology of the First Vertebrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use a series of hydrodynamic experiments on abstracted models to explore whether primitive vertebrates may have swum under various conditions without a clearly-differentiated tail fin. Cambrian vertebrates had post-anal stubby tails, some had single dorsal and ventral fins, but none had yet evolved a clearly differentiated caudal fin typical of post-Cambrian fishes, and must have relied on their long and flexible laterally-compressed bodies for locomotion, i.e., by bending their bodies side-to-side in order to propagate waves from head to tail. We approach this problem experimentally based on an abstracted model of Metaspriggina walcotti from the 506-million-year old Burgess Shale by using oscillating thin flexible plates while varying the tail fin geometry from rectangular to uniform, and finally to a no tail-fin condition. Despite a missing tail fin, this study supports the observation that the abstracted Metaspriggina model can generate a strong propulsive force in cruise conditions, both away from, and near the sea bed (in ground effect). However, when the abstracted Metaspriggina model moves in ground effect, a weaker performance is observed, indicating that Metaspriggina may not necessarily have been optimized for swimming near the sea bed. When considering acceleration from rest, we find that the Metaspriggina model's performance is not significantly different from other morphological models (abstracted truncate tail and abstracted heterocercal tail). Statistical analysis shows that morphological parameters, swimming modes, and ground effect all play significant roles in thrust performance. While the exact relationships of Cambrian vertebrates are still debated, as agnathans, they share some general characteristics with modern cyclostomes, in particular an elongate body akin to lampreys. Lampreys, as anguilliform swimmers, are considered to be some of the most efficient swimmers using a particular type of suction thrust induced by the traveling body wave as it travels from head to tail. Our current experiments suggest that Metaspriggina's ability in acceleration from rest, through possibly a similar type of suction thrust, which is defined as the ability to generate low pressure on upstream facing sections of the body, might have evolved early in response to increasing predator pressure during the Cambrian Explosion.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".