ArticleJournal of mammalian evolution2022
Investigating the reliability of metapodials as taxonomic Indicators for Beringian horses.
Article in Journal of mammalian evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The metapodials of extinct horses have long been regarded as one of the most useful skeletal elements to determine taxonomic identity. However, recent research on both extant and extinct horses has revealed the possibility for plasticity in metapodial morphology, leading to notable variability within taxa. This calls into question the reliability of metapodials in species identification, particularly for species identified from fragmentary remains. Here, we use ten measurements of metapodials from 203 specimens of four Pleistocene horse species from eastern Beringia to test whether there are significant differences in metapodial morphology that support the presence of multiple species. We then reconstruct the body masses for every specimen to assess the range in body size within each species and determine whether species differ significantly from one another in mean body mass. We find that that taxonomic groups are based largely on the overall size of the metapodial, and that all metapodial measurements are highly autocorrelated. We also find that mean body mass differs significantly among most, but not all, species. We suggest that metapodial measurements are unreliable taxonomic indicators for Beringian horses given evidence for plasticity in metapodial morphology and their clear reflection of differences in body mass. We recommend future studies use more reliable indicators of taxonomy to identify Beringian horse species, particularly from localities from which fossils of several species have been recovered. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10914-022-09626-4.
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.