Salamander braincase morphology as revealed by micro‐computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphological data sets are misleading in salamander (Caudata) phylogeny due to the relative homoplasy of the dermal skull observed in paedomorphic forms, leading to the trend of excluding morphology when exploring questions of salamander phylogeny. Investigations in caecilians (Gymnophiona) have demonstrated that the inclusion of braincase morphology can rescue morphological phylogenetic analyses and produce topologies congruent with molecular data sets. We scanned 28 species (25 genera) of salamander, representing all 10 families, with high-resolution micro-computed tomography to investigate braincase variation. We describe the morphology of the braincase for all 10 families and distinguish between paedomorphic and metamorphic morphologies. Our results demonstrate a general uniformity amongst metamorphic species with variation largely restricted to the occipito-otic region. A greater range of variation is observed within paedomorphic forms than would be expected when considering the homoplasy of the dermal skull. Obligate paedomorphic forms demonstrate considerably more variation in the anterior braincase than do facultative paedomorphs, which we suggest is evidence of a greater complexity in the evolution and development of these forms than neoteny alone would produce. This raises the question of character independence within morphological data sets and warrants further investigation into the correlation of other characters before morphological data are omitted.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".