ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2019
Burgess Shale fossils shed light on the agnostid problem.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Episodic body size variations of early Paleozoic trilobites associated with marine redox changes.Science advances · 2025Article
- Early evolvability in arthropod tagmosis exemplified by a new radiodont from the Burgess Shale.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Morphological Evolution and Extinction of Eodiscids and Agnostoid Arthropods.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Reassessing a cryptic history of early trilobite evolution.Communications biology · 2022Review
- A giant nektobenthic radiodont from the Burgess Shale and the significance of hurdiid carapace diversity.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
- Fossils from South China redefine the ancestral euarthropod body plan.BMC evolutionary biology · 2020Article
- Fine-scale appendage structure of the Cambrian trilobitomorphProceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Agnostids (agnostinids and eodiscinids) are a widespread and biostratigraphically important group of Cambro-Ordovician euarthropods whose evolutionary affinities have been highly controversial. Their dumbbell-shaped calcified tergum was traditionally suggested to unite them with trilobites, but agnostinids have alternatively been interpreted as stem-crustaceans, based on Orsten larval material from the Cambrian of Sweden. We describe exceptionally preserved soft tissues from mature individuals of the agnostinids Peronopsis and Ptychagnostus from the middle Cambrian (Wuliuan Stage) Burgess Shale (Walcott Quarry and Marble Canyon, British Columbia, Canada), facilitating the testing of alternative hypotheses. The digestive tract includes conspicuous ramifying cephalic diverticulae. The cephalon carries one pair of elongate spinous antennules projecting to the front, two pairs of appendages with distally setose, oar-like exopods, and three pairs of presumably biramous appendages with endopods sporting club-shaped exites. The trunk bears five appendage pairs, at least the first two of which are similar to the posteriormost cephalic pairs. The combined evidence supports a nektobenthic and detritivorous lifestyle for agnostinids. A head with six appendiferous segments contrasts strikingly with the four known in trilobites and five typical of mandibulates. Agnostinids are retrieved as the sister group to polymeroid trilobites in our phylogeny, implying that crustacean-like morphologies evolved homoplastically. This result highlights the variability in segmental composition of the artiopodan head. Finally, our study emphasizes the continued role of Burgess Shale-type fossils in resolving the affinities of problematic biomineralizing taxa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.