MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effaced preservation in the Ediacara biota and its implications for the early macrofossil record

2010· article· en· W1536342710 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexander Liu, Duncan McIlroy, Jonathan B. Antcliffe, Martin D. Brasier

Bibliographic record

VenuePalaeontology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Environment and Conservation, Government of Newfoundland and LabradorBritish Geological SurveyCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPaleontologyMacrofossilGeologyBiotaTaphonomyEcologyBiologyHolocene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Ediacaran structures known as ‘pizza discs’ orIvesheadiahave long been considered enigmatic. They are amongst the oldest known members of the Ediacara biota, apparently restricted to the Avalonian successions of Newfoundland and the UK,c. 579–560 Ma. Here, we suggest that these impressions are taphomorphs, resulting from the post‐mortem decay of the frondose Ediacaran biota. Ediacaran fossils range from well‐preserved, high‐fidelity variants to almost completely effaced specimens. The effaced specimens are inferred to have undergone modification of their original morphology by post‐mortem microbial decay on the sea floor, combined with sediment trapping and binding. In this style of preservation, morphological details within the organism became variously subdued as a function of the extent of organic decay prior to casting by overlying sediments. Decay and effacement were progressive in nature, producing a continuum of grades of preservation on Ediacaran bedding planes. Fossils preserved by such ‘effaced preservation’ are those that have suffered these processes to the extent that only their gross form can be determined. We suggest that the lack of detailed morphology in effaced specimens renders such fossils unsuitable for use as type material, as it is possible that several taxa may, upon degradation and burial, generate similar morphological taphomorphs. We here reinterpret the genusIvesheadiaas a taphomorph resulting from extensive post‐mortem decay of frondose organisms.Blackbrookia,PseudovendiaandShepshediafrom beds of comparable age in England are likewise regarded as taphomorphs broadly related toCharniaorCharniodiscusspp. To reflect the suggestion that such impressions are likely to be taphomorphs, and not taxonomically discrete, we propose the term ivesheadiomorphs to incorporate all such effaced taphonomic expressions of Ediacaran macrofossil taxa in Avalonian assemblages. Our recognition of effaced preservation has significant implications for Ediacaran taxonomy, and consequently for measures of Ediacaran diversity and disparity. It is implied that Avalonian assemblages preserve both organisms that were alive and organisms that were already dead at the time of burial. As such, the fossil assemblages cannot be taken to represent census populations of living organisms, as in prior interpretations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations109
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalaeontologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207