Exceptional preservation and foot structure reveal ecological transitions and lifestyles of early theropod flyers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphology of keratinised toe pads and foot scales, hinging of foot joints and claw shape and size all inform the grasping ability, cursoriality and feeding mode of living birds. Presented here is morphological evidence from the fossil feet of early theropod flyers. Foot soft tissues and joint articulations are qualitatively assessed using laser-stimulated fluorescence. Pedal claw shape and size are quantitatively analysed using traditional morphometrics. We interpret these foot data among existing evidence to better understand the evolutionary ecology of early theropod flyers. Jurassic flyers like Anchiornis and Archaeopteryx show adaptations suggestive of relatively ground-dwelling lifestyles. Early Cretaceous flyers then diversify into more aerial lifestyles, including generalists like Confuciusornis and specialists like the climbing Fortunguavis. Some early birds, like the Late Jurassic Berlin Archaeopteryx and Early Cretaceous Sapeornis, show complex ecologies seemingly unique among sampled modern birds. As a non-bird flyer, finding affinities of Microraptor to a more specialised raptorial lifestyle is unexpected. Its hawk-like characteristics are rare among known theropod flyers of the time suggesting that some non-bird flyers perform specialised roles filled by birds today. We demonstrate diverse ecological profiles among early theropod flyers, changing as flight developed, and some non-bird flyers have more complex ecological roles.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".