Supplementary material from "First record of growth patterns in a Cambrian annelid"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early annelid evolution is mostly known from 13 described species from Cambrian Burgess Shale-type Lagerstätten. We introduce a new exceptionally well-preserved and abundant Cambrian polychaete, <i>Ursactis comosa</i> gen. et sp. nov., a small (3–15 mm) species often occurring in large clusters. Most specimens come from a new Burgess Shale (Wuliuan Stage) locality in northern Kootenay National Park, BC, Canada. <i>Ursactis</i> has a pair of large palps, thin peristomial neurochaetae and biramous parapodia bearing similarly sized capillary neurochaetae and notochaetae, except for segments six to nine, which also have longer notochaetae. The number of segments in this polychaete range between 8 and 10 with larger individuals having 10 segments. This number of segments in <i>Ursactis</i> is remarkably small compared with other polychaetes, including modern forms. Specimens with 10 segments show significant size variations, and the length of each segment increases with the body length, indicating that body growth was primarily achieved by increasing the size of existing segments rather than adding new ones. This contrasts with most modern polychaetes, which typically have a larger number of segments through additions of segments throughout life. The inferred growth pattern in <i>Ursactis</i> suggests that annelids had evolved control over segment addition by the mid-Cambrian.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.951 | 0.022 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".