MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552104784 · doi:10.1029/2007gc001807

A multiaxial growth analysis of stable isotopes in the modern shell of <i>Saxidomus gigantea</i>: Implications for sclerochronology studies

2008· article· en· W1552104784 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Kingston, Darren R. Gröcke, Meghan Burchell

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Geophysics Geosystems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsShell (structure)Sinistral and dextralIsotopeStable isotope ratioGeologyIsotope analysisδ13CPaleontologyMaterials sciencePhysicsOceanographyFault (geology)Nuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stable‐isotope ratios of two modern Saxidomus gigantea specimens from Namu, British Columbia, are presented to show intraspecimen and interspecimen isotopic variation. Isotopic profiles ( δ 13 C shell , δ 18 O shell ) were generated along the axis of maximum growth. The profiles show that analogous seasonal variation is recorded in δ 18 O shell ; however, significant variability is recorded in δ 13 C shell . We suggest this is caused by differences in metabolic activity between individuals. Intrashell variability along a growth horizon shows good reproducibility in δ 13 C shell but significant variability in δ 18 O shell , especially at the sinistral margin. A multiaxial growth analysis generated several profiles from a single valve. Similar seasonal variations are recorded in δ 18 O shell along all axes. δ 13 C shell show significantly less covariation, possibly related to internal metabolic activity. This study highlights that δ 18 O shell profiles generated from any portion of the shell can be used to evaluate seasonal fluctuations and may be excellent to evaluate types and rates of shell growth.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Geophysics GeosystemsSame topicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture StudiesFrench-language works237,207