MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6957751005 · doi:10.60692/22e0h-7xg09

Palatal morphology predicts the paleobiology of early salamanders

2022· article· en· W6957751005 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleobiologyMorphology (biology)Most recent common ancestorMetamorphosisAncestorBiological evolutionEvolutionary developmental biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ecological preferences and life history strategies have enormous impacts on the evolution and phenotypic diversity of salamanders, but the yet established reliable ecological indicators hinder investigations on the paleobiology of early salamanders. Here we statistically demonstrate using geometric morphometric analysis that both the shape of the palate and many non-shape variables particularly associated with vomerine teeth are ecologically informative in early stem- and basal crown-group salamanders. The morphology of the palate is heavily impacted by convergence constrained by feeding mechanisms and also exhibits clear stepwise evolutionary patterns with alternative phenotypic designs to cope with similar functional demand. Paleoecological disparities in early salamanders had took place before the Middle Jurassic and have achieved all ecological preferences in the Early Cretaceous. Metamorphosis is significant in the expansion of ecomorphospace of the palate in early salamanders. The common ancestor of salamanders is metamorphosed and terrestrial, and share unified lifestyles with other modern amphibians.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207