MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321503884 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2022.0454

Whole-body variational modularity in the zebrafish: an inside-out story of a model species

2023· article· en· W4321503884 on OpenAlexafffund
Olivia Vanhaesebroucke, Olivier Larouche, Richard Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
KeywordsBiologyModularity (biology)DanioPostcraniaMorphometricsEcomorphologyNeurocraniumEvolutionary biologySkullZebrafishEcologyAnatomyTaxonHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actinopterygians are the most diversified clade of extant vertebrates. Their impressive morphological disparity bears witness to tremendous ecological diversity. Modularity, the organization of biological systems into quasi-independent anatomical/morphological units, is thought to increase evolvability of organisms and facilitate morphological diversification. Our study aims to quantify patterns of variational modularity in a model actinopterygian, the zebrafish (Danio rerio), using three-dimensional geometric morphometrics on osteological structures isolated from micro-CT scans. A total of 72 landmarks were digitized along cranial and postcranial ossified regions of 30 adult zebrafishes. Two methods were used to test modularity hypotheses, the covariance ratio and the distance matrix approach. We find strong support for two modules, one comprised paired fins and the other comprised median fins, that are best explained by functional properties of subcarangiform swimming. While the skull is tightly integrated with the rest of the body, its intrinsic integration is relatively weak supporting previous findings that the fish skull is a modular structure. Our results provide additional support for the recognition of similar hypotheses of modularity identified based on external morphology in various teleosts, and at least two variational modules are proposed. Thus, our results hint at the possibility that internal and external modularity patterns may be congruent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207