ArticleJournal of morphology2025
Microanatomy of Dermal Roofing Bones in the Skull of Pipoid Frogs.
Article in Journal of morphology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diverse ossification pathways in the lower jaw of Sclerocephalus (Lower Permian) as revealed by the first record of chondroid bone in Amphibia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Microanatomy of Dermal Roofing Bones in the Skull of Pipoid Frogs.Journal of morphology · 2025Article
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
Previous research on bone microanatomy in amphibians suggests a correlation of microanatomical traits with both environmental and phylogenetic factors, but so far, studies had been limited to long bones. Using Pipoidea, a uniquely adapted clade of fully aquatic anurans, we investigated whether the microanatomical structures of anuran cranial bones display not only an ecological but also a clade-specific signal. Micro-CT scans of the skulls of five extant and three extinct pipoids species were compared with those of four phylogenetically distant, yet similarly aquatic anurans. We focused on the frontoparietal and maxillary bones, because they are among the largest bones in the anuran skull and are often preserved as fossils. From each of the bones the overall compactness, cross-sectional area, and thickness were extracted. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between the three groups in thickness and cross-sectional area, which is consistent with their shared lifestyle. Compactness, however, revealed a statistically significant difference between the Pipoidea clade and the phylogenetically distant group. Our findings suggest the presence of both a clade-specific and an environmental signal in the bone compactness of the pipoidean skull.
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.