The osteology of ‘Periptychus carinidens’: a robust, ungulate-like placental mammal (Mammalia: Periptychidae) from the Paleocene of North America

Periptychus is the archetypal genus of Periptychidae, a clade of prolific Paleocene 'condylarth' mammals from North America that were among the first placental mammals to radiate after the end-Cretaceous extinction, remarkable for their distinctive dental anatomy. A comprehensive understanding of the anatomy of Periptychus has been hindered by a lack of cranial and postcranial material and only cursory description of existing material. We comprehensively describe the cranial, dental and postcranial anatomy of Periptychus carinidens based on new fossil material from the early Paleocene (Torrejonian) of New Mexico, USA. The cranial anatomy of Periptychus is broadly concurrent with the inferred plesiomorphic eutherian condition, albeit more robust in overall construction. The rostrum is moderately elongate with no constriction, the facial region is broad, and the braincase is small with a well-exposed mastoid on the posterolateral corner and tall sagittal and nuchal crests. The dentition of Periptychus is characterized by strongly crenulated enamel, enlarged upper and lower premolars with a tall centralised paracone/protoconid. The postcranial skeleton of Periptychus is that of a robust, medium-sized (~20 Kg) stout-limbed animal that was incipiently mediportal and adopted a plantigrade stance. The structure of the fore- and hindlimb of Periptychus corresponds to that of a typically terrestrial mammal, while morphological features of the forelimb such as the low tubercles of the humerus, long and prominent deltopectoral crest, pronounced medial epicondyle, and hemispherical capitulum indicate some scansorial and/or fossorial ability. Most striking is the strongly dorsoplantarly compressed astragalus of Periptychus, which in combination with the distal crus and calcaneal morphology indicates a moderately mobile cruropedal joint. The anatomy of Periptychus is unique and lacks any extant analogue; it combines a basic early placental body plan with numerous unique specializations in its dental, cranial and postcranial anatomy that exemplify the ability of mammals to adapt and evolve following catastrophic environmental upheaval

Coverage, Continuity and Visual Cortical Architecture

The primary visual cortex of many mammals contains a continuous representation of visual space, with a roughly repetitive aperiodic map of orientation preferences superimposed. It was recently found that orientation preference maps (OPMs) obey statistical laws which are apparently invariant among species widely separated in eutherian evolution. Here, we examine whether one of the most prominent models for the optimization of cortical maps, the elastic net (EN) model, can reproduce this common design. The EN model generates representations which optimally trade of stimulus space coverage and map continuity. While this model has been used in numerous studies, no analytical results about the precise layout of the predicted OPMs have been obtained so far. We present a mathematical approach to analytically calculate the cortical representations predicted by the EN model for the joint mapping of stimulus position and orientation. We find that in all previously studied regimes, predicted OPM layouts are perfectly periodic. An unbiased search through the EN parameter space identifies a novel regime of aperiodic OPMs with pinwheel densities lower than found in experiments. In an extreme limit, aperiodic OPMs quantitatively resembling experimental observations emerge. Stabilization of these layouts results from strong nonlocal interactions rather than from a coverage-continuity-compromise. Our results demonstrate that optimization models for stimulus representations dominated by nonlocal suppressive interactions are in principle capable of correctly predicting the common OPM design. They question that visual cortical feature representations can be explained by a coverage-continuity-compromise.Comment: 100 pages, including an Appendix, 21 + 7 figure

“Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences

The hypothesis of a Hierarchy of the Sciences with physical sciences at the top, social sciences at the bottom, and biological sciences in-between is nearly 200 years old. This order is intuitive and reflected in many features of academic life, but whether it reflects the “hardness” of scientific research—i.e., the extent to which research questions and results are determined by data and theories as opposed to non-cognitive factors—is controversial. This study analysed 2434 papers published in all disciplines and that declared to have tested a hypothesis. It was determined how many papers reported a “positive” (full or partial) or “negative” support for the tested hypothesis. If the hierarchy hypothesis is correct, then researchers in “softer” sciences should have fewer constraints to their conscious and unconscious biases, and therefore report more positive outcomes. Results confirmed the predictions at all levels considered: discipline, domain and methodology broadly defined. Controlling for observed differences between pure and applied disciplines, and between papers testing one or several hypotheses, the odds of reporting a positive result were around 5 times higher among papers in the disciplines of Psychology and Psychiatry and Economics and Business compared to Space Science, 2.3 times higher in the domain of social sciences compared to the physical sciences, and 3.4 times higher in studies applying behavioural and social methodologies on people compared to physical and chemical studies on non-biological material. In all comparisons, biological studies had intermediate values. These results suggest that the nature of hypotheses tested and the logical and methodological rigour employed to test them vary systematically across disciplines and fields, depending on the complexity of the subject matter and possibly other factors (e.g., a field's level of historical and/or intellectual development). On the other hand, these results support the scientific status of the social sciences against claims that they are completely subjective, by showing that, when they adopt a scientific approach to discovery, they differ from the natural sciences only by a matter of degree