Imaging With the Past: Revealing the Complexity of Chimaeroid Pelvic Musculature Anatomy and Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chondrichthyans are now widely adopted as models for examining the development and evolution of the stem gnathostome body plan. The fins of some cartilaginous fish are recognized for their plesiomorphic form and mode of muscular development, i.e., epithelial extension. Despite detailed molecular and descriptive examinations of these developmental mechanisms, there has been little contemporary examination of the ontogeny and morphology of the musculature in chondrichthyans including that of the paired fins. This gap represents a need for further examination of the developmental morphology of these appendicular musculatures to gain insight into their evolution in gnathostomes. The elephant shark is a Holocephalan, the sister group of all other chondrichthyans (Holocephali: Callorhinchus milii ). Here, we use nano-CT imaging and 3D reconstructions to describe the development of the pelvic musculature of a growth series of elephant shark embryos. We also use historical descriptions from the nineteenth century and traditional dissection methods to describe the adult anatomy. This combined approach, using traditional methods and historical knowledge with modern imaging techniques, has enabled a more thorough examination of the anatomy and development of the pelvic musculature revealing that chimaeroid musculatures are more complex than previously thought. These data, when compared to extant and extinct sister taxa, are essential for interpreting and reconstructing fossil musculatures as well as understanding the evolution of paired fins.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".