Deep homologies in chordate caudal central nervous systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invertebrate chordates, such as the tunicate Ciona, can offer insight into the evolution of the chordate phylum. Anatomical features that are shared between invertebrate chordates and vertebrates may be taken as evidence of their presence in a common chordate ancestor. The central nervous systems of Ciona larvae and vertebrates share a similar anatomy despite the Ciona CNS having ~180 neurons. However, the depth of conservation between the Ciona CNS and those in vertebrates is not resolved. The Ciona caudal CNS, while appearing spinal cord-like, has hitherto been thought to lack motor neurons, bringing into question its homology with the vertebrate spinal cord. We show here that the Ciona larval caudal CNS does, in fact, have functional motor neurons along its length, pointing to the presence of a spinal cord-like structure at the base of the chordates. We extend our analysis of shared CNS anatomy further to explore the Ciona motor ganglion, which has been proposed to be a homolog of the vertebrate hindbrain, spinal cord, or both. We find that a cluster of neurons in the dorsal motor ganglion shares anatomical location, developmental pathway, neural circuit architecture, and gene expression with the vertebrate cerebellum. However, functionally, the Ciona cluster appears to have more in common with vertebrate cerebellum-like structures, insofar as it receives and processes direct sensory input. These findings are consistent with earlier speculation that the cerebellum evolved from a cerebellum-like structure, and suggest that the latter structure was present in the dorsal hindbrain of a common chordate ancestor.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".