MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408200938 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-91987-w

Single cones give rise to multi-cone types in the retinas of fishes

2025· article· en· W4408200938 on OpenAlexafffund
Iñigo Novales Flamarique, Lisa A. Grebinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCone (formal languages)Computer scienceBiologyAnatomyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retinal cone photoreceptors are specialized neurons that capture light to begin the process of daylight vision. They occur as individual cells (i.e., single cones), or as combinations of structurally linked cells, such as the double and triple cones found in the retinas of non-eutherian vertebrates. These different morphological cone types form mosaics of varying regularity, with single and double cones patterned as nearly perfect lattices in the retinas of many bony fishes (teleosts) and some geckos. Although double cones were first reported over 150 years ago, how they form (i.e., whether from coalescing single cones, or from structurally linked cone progenitors) remains uncertain. In turn, whether there is a general vertebrate sequence in appearance of morphological cone types and mosaics is unknown. Here, the developing retinas of seven species of teleosts were examined revealing that only single cones, arranged in hexagonal-like mosaics, were present at the earliest stages of photoreceptor differentiation. Double cones arose from coalescing single cones and the formation of multi-cone type mosaics (such as the square mosaic, where each single cone is surrounded by four double cones) followed different dynamics depending on whether the species was altricial or precocial. Single cones were therefore the primordial cells from which all multi-cone types arose and hexagonal-like mosaics preceded other mosaic patterns. Based on observations from transitional retinas, we propose a model for mosaic transformation from hexagonal to square. The double cones of fishes and those of land vertebrates constitute an example of convergent evolution to achieve the elliptical waveguide structure, likely for improved spatio-temporal resolution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207