The vertebrate bone hypothesis: Understanding the impact of bone on vertebrate stoichiometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding how animals store and recycle nutrients is a major question in ecological stoichiometry, a field that applies mass‐balance to ecological and physiological processes. However, ecological stoichiometry has thus far failed to accurately predict elemental demand and release in vertebrates. Because they invest in bone, a tissue mineralized with calcium phosphate, vertebrates are phosphorus (P) rich, allowing them to uniquely impact P cycling. Nonetheless, bone's impact goes further than merely changing vertebrate body elemental content. We propose a potential guiding hypothesis for vertebrate P stoichiometry called the ‘Vertebrate Bone Hypothesis (VBH)’. The VBH has three components: (1)Bone strongly impacts vertebrate whole‐body %P and N:P. (2) Bone is a P storage tissue that acts in elemental homeostasis. (3)Bone does not have constant elemental content. To characterize this hypothesis, we integrate bone physiology with stoichiometric principles, and we systematically review quantitative bone measurements to showcase cryptic diversity in vertebrate P content. Finally, we apply the characteristics of the VBH to ontogeny and reproduction, both of which impact bone physiology and elemental demand, to demonstrate the context dependency of bone's stoichiometric impact. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".