MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413057691 · doi:10.1101/2025.07.15.664975

The dorsal/ventral subdivision of the hindbrain predates the tunicate/vertebrate split

2025· preprint· en· W4413057691 on OpenAlexaff
Yishen Miao, Erin Newman‐Smith, Kerrianne Ryan, William C. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersOffice of ScienceNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsHindbrainChordateBiologyCionaVertebrateTunicateCiona intestinalisCerebellumBody planDorsumAnatomyNeuroscienceEvolutionary biologyGeneCentral nervous systemGeneticsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the CNSs of the chordate sister clades Tunicata and Vertebrata have unmistakable homology, the extent of their conservation is still being uncovered. We report that the hindbrain of the tunicate Ciona, like those of vertebrates, has functionally-distinct dorsal and ventral domains. The Ciona dorsal hindbrain functions as a relay and processing center for peripheral sensory neurons, while in vertebrates the dorsal hindbrain forms the cerebellum. Despite the different fates of dorsal hindbrains in Ciona versus vertebrates, we present evidence from analysis of gene expression, developmental mechanisms, and neural circuit architecture that they share a common origin. While it is generally agreed that the cerebellum evolved in vertebrates, our findings indicate that a dorsally-positioned precursor to the cerebellum has much deeper roots.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207