MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415894341 · doi:10.1098/rsos.250802

Interplay between evolutionary history, morphological constraints and functional adaptations in the primate cochlea

2025· article· en· W4415894341 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joaquı́n Del Rı́o, Manuela Nowotny, Romain David, Alexander Stoessel

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal Society Open Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMuséum National d'Histoire NaturelleCalleva FoundationFlorida Museum of Natural HistoryUniversity of TorontoYale University
KeywordsCochleaPrimateAdaptation (eye)MorphometricsBasilar membranePhylogeneticsMorphology (biology)Phylogenetic tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How the intricate mammalian cochlea evolved, and its functional implications, remain only partly understood. Here, we explore cochlear morphology across 101 extant and fossil species of the mammalian grand order Euarchonta using micro-computed tomography, three-dimensional geometric morphometrics and phylogenetic comparative analyses. We find substantial shape variation across taxa, likely driven by an interplay between evolutionary history, morphological constraints and potentially functional demands, although these remain difficult to interpret. Evolutionary models suggest the rate of cochlear shape evolution was heterogeneous, with some lineages showing particularly high rates, likely linked with adaptive selection pressures (e.g. tarsiers, Cercopithecus ). Ancestral state reconstructions reveal lemuriforms retain the ancestral strepsirrhine cochlear shape—conical with around 2½ turns—while lorisiforms exhibit a derived cylindrical cochlea with increased coiling. The highly coiled cochlea of tarsiers reflects cranial constraints and functional demands, particularly for high-frequency hearing. In anthropoids, platyrrhines nest within catarrhine variation. Among the latter, cercopithecins trend towards increased coiling, whereas colobines and hominoids retain less coiled shapes. Finally, while body size has little effect on cochlear shape, its interaction with cochlear length predicts the number of turns, supporting the theory that cochlear coiling enabled the development of a longer basilar membrane within a small petrous space.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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 venueRoyal Society Open ScienceSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207