ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Mass extinctions in the Azores during the last glaciation: fact or myth?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim The influence of the last glaciation on the shallow‐water marine malacofauna of the Azores Islands is reviewed. We test, for this fauna, the ‘Pleistocene temperature theory’ of J.C. Briggs, which hypothesizes that a (supposed) lack of endemics in the older (Azorean endemic) fauna resulted from extinctions caused by a severe drop in sea surface temperatures during the Pleistocene. Location Santa Maria Island, Azores, Portugal. Methods We compare the fossil mollusc fauna of Prainha, Praia do Calhau and Lagoinhas Pleistocene outcrops with the recent mollusc fauna of the Azores Islands. We dated the fossil fauna, using shells of Patella aspera Röding, 1798, by standard U/Th methodology at the GEOTOP laboratory (Université du Québec à Montreal, Canada). Results Dating of the shells of P. aspera indicates that the deposition of the lower unit of the Prainha outcrop corresponded to Marine Oxygen Isotope Substage 5e (MISS 5e). Not a single endemic Azorean species of mollusc that is present in the Pleistocene fossil record has since become extinct, and we found no signs of ‘mass extinctions’ in the littoral marine molluscs of the Azores. The only species that were extirpated from these islands were thermophilic molluscs and littoral bivalves living in fine sand. Main conclusions Our results do not support Briggs’‘Pleistocene temperature theory’. Nor did we find evidence supporting the hypothesis that most of the marine organisms now present in the Azores recolonized the islands after the last glacial maximum.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".