MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413769671 · doi:10.1111/joa.70037

The histology of rhynchosaur (Diapsida, Archosauromorpha) ankylothecodonty

2025· article· en· W4413769671 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabriel Mestriner, Gregory F. Funston, Sterling J. Nesbitt, Júlio C. A. Marsola, David C. Evans, Christian A. Sidor, Max C. Langer, Aaron R. H. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anatomy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Earth SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloNational Geographic SocietyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHistologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of the connection between the teeth and the jaw is important for understanding the palaeobiology of vertebrates, but inconsistent terminology and incomplete sampling have made it difficult to assess the evolutionary significance of some of the related characters. Among archosauromorphs, tooth attachment in dinosaurs and crocodylians is nearly identical to that of mammals in featuring a ligamentous connection (gomphosis), whereas closely related forms appear to have teeth fused to the jaws (ankylosis), as in most other amniotes. Hence, studying tooth attachment of stem-archosaurs is pivotal to characterize the main shifts in tooth attachment seen in the lineage. Here, we analyze the tooth attachment of rhynchosaurs - a group of quadrupedal herbivorous archosauromorphs that played a key role as primary consumers in many Triassic communities. Their dentition consists of multiple rows of marginal teeth with posterolingual addition of teeth during growth, but their tooth attachment has not been documented in a modern context. Histological data from three rhynchosaur specimens from the Middle Triassic Manda Beds of Tanzania show that, although ankylosed, rhynchosaur teeth are surrounded by an extensive network of Sharpey's fibers, layers of cementum, and well-defined zones of alveolar bone. What has been previously described as "spongy bone of attachment" in fact encompasses the same attachment tissues present in mammals, dinosaurs, and crocodylians, albeit completely mineralized in mature teeth. Analysis of different stages of tooth development shows that ankylosis occurs by the growth of alveolar bone towards the cellular cementum, which eventually mineralizes the soft ligament. This suggests that the tissues conflated as "bone of attachment"-alveolar bone, periodontal ligament, and cellular cementum-are homologous across Archosauromorpha. Our data add to a growing body of evidence that heterochronic changes to the timing and extents of mineralization, not convergent evolution to mammal-like attachment tissues, led to the independent evolution of gomphosis across many amniote lineages, including archosauromorphs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AnatomySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207