Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31912655›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2020

Development and evolution of the tetrapod skull-neck boundary.

Hillary C Maddin, Nadine Piekarski, Robert R Reisz, James Hanken

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hillary C MaddinMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, U.S.A.ORCID 0000-0002-6969-4907
Nadine PiekarskiMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, U.S.A.
Robert R ReiszDepartment of Biology, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5L 1C6, Canada.
James HankenMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, U.S.A.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-04633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The origin and evolution of the vertebrate skull have been topics of intense study for more than two centuries. Whereas early theories of skull origin, such as the influential vertebral theory, have been largely refuted with respect to the anterior (pre-otic) region of the skull, the posterior (post-otic) region is known to be derived from the anteriormost paraxial segments, i.e. the somites. Here we review the morphology and development of the occiput in both living and extinct tetrapods, taking into account revised knowledge of skull development by augmenting historical accounts with recent data. When occipital composition is evaluated relative to its position along the neural axis, and specifically to the hypoglossal nerve complex, much of the apparent interspecific variation in the location of the skull-neck boundary stabilizes in a phylogenetically informative way. Based on this criterion, three distinct conditions are identified in (i) frogs, (ii) salamanders and caecilians, and (iii) amniotes. The position of the posteriormost occipital segment relative to the hypoglossal nerve is key to understanding the evolution of the posterior limit of the skull. By using cranial foramina as osteological proxies of the hypoglossal nerve, a survey of fossil taxa reveals the amniote condition to be present at the base of Tetrapoda. This result challenges traditional theories of cranial evolution, which posit translocation of the occiput to a more posterior location in amniotes relative to lissamphibians (frogs, salamanders, caecilians), and instead supports the largely overlooked hypothesis that the reduced occiput in lissamphibians is secondarily derived. Recent advances in our understanding of the genetic basis of axial patterning and its regulation in amniotes support the hypothesis that the lissamphibian occipital form may have arisen as the product of a homeotic shift in segment fate from an amniote-like condition.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsAnuraBirdsCaudataCervical VertebraeExtinction, BiologicalFossilsHypoglossal NerveMammalsNeckOccipital BonePhylogenyReptilesSkullSpinal Canaldevelopmenthomeotic transformationocciputskullskull-necksomitestetrapod

Identifiers

PMID31912655
PMCPMC7318664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.