Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34956072›Full record

ArticleSwiss journal of palaeontology2021

Evolutionary development of the cephalopod arm armature: a review.

Dirk Fuchs, René Hoffmann, Christian Klug

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Swiss journal of palaeontology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Uniqueness and predictability in evolution and the history of mollusks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dirk FuchsBayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Geologie, Richard-Wagner-Straße 10, 80333 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0648-1231
René HoffmannInstitute of Geology, Mineralogy, & Geophysics, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.
Christian KlugPaläontologisches Institut und Museum, Universität Zürich, Karl-Schmid-Strasse 4, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Geologie · DERuhr University Bochum · DEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cephalopod arm armature is certainly one of the most important morphological innovations responsible for the evolutionary success of the Cephalopoda. New palaeontological discoveries in the recent past afford to review and reassess origin and homology of suckers, sucker rings, hooks, and cirri. Since a priori character state reconstructions are still ambiguous, we suggest and discuss three different evolutionary scenarios. Each of them is based on the following assumptions: (1) Neocoleoidea uniting extant Decabrachia and Octobrachia is monophyletic (= proostracum-bearing coleoids); (2) extinct Belemnitida and Diplobelida are stem decabrachians; (3) proostracum-less coleoids (Hematitida, Donovaniconida, Aulacoceratida) represent stem-neocoleoids; (4) Ammonoidea and Bactritoidea are stem coleoids. We consider a scenario where belemnoid hooks derived from primitive suckers as well-supported. Regarding belemnoid hooks and suckers as homologues implies that belemnoid, oegopsid, and probably ammonoid arm hooks arose through parallel evolution. Our conclusions challenge the widespread opinion, whereupon belemnoid hooks evolved de novo, and instead support earlier ideas formulated by Sigurd von Boletzky.

Identifiers

PMID34956072
PMCPMC8688392
OpenAlexW4200045417

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.