Morphological diversity of the cetacean mandibular symphysis coincides with novel modes of aquatic feeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In whales, extreme modifications to the ancestral mammalian feeding apparatus facilitate novel modes of aquatic feeding. These modifications manifest in morphological diversity across a suite of characters, including the mandibular symphysis. Cetaceans span a range of symphyseal morphologies, with one lineage (crown mysticetes) evolving a highly mobile condition unique among mammals. Here, we use phylogenetic comparative methods to examine the evolution of symphyseal fusion and elongation across 206 extant and fossil cetacean taxa. Ancestral state reconstructions corroborate observations from the fossil record that suggest the ancestral condition for Cetacea was a fused, moderately elongated symphysis. Shifts in symphyseal morphology coincided with ocean restructuring and diversification of feeding modes. Evolutionary rates peaked in the middle-late Eocene and at the Eocene-Oligocene boundary as whales evolved shorter, unfused symphyses. During the Eocene, ankylosed mandibles became less common with the appearance of increasingly pelagic whales. Mysticetes evolved decoupled, highly mobile mandibles near the Eocene-Oligocene boundary. Several odontocete lineages underwent a trait reversal and converged on fully fused, elongated mandibles in the Miocene. Analyses evaluating the influence of ecological variables indicate strong correlations in feeding strategy, dentition, and prey type. The loss of prey-processing behavior and changes to masticatory loading regimes may explain concurrent trends in symphyseal morphology and tooth simplification. We suggest that the functional and morphological diversity of the symphysis in whales is a consequence of aquatic feeding imposing different mechanical constraints than those associated with feeding on land.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".