Growth characteristics in co-occurring Upper Ordovician species of the tabulate <i>Catenipora</i> from southern Manitoba, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four species of the tabulate coral Catenipora are present in the Selkirk Member of the Red River Formation at Garson, Manitoba. They provide an opportunity to compare the growth characteristics of multiple, co-occurring species that produced cateniform coralla. Corallite increase, cyclomorphism and other growth features show high variability within and/or among the species. A total of five types of lateral increase and two types of axial increase are recognized. Lateral increase accounts for over 80% of all occurrences of corallite increase in each species, with the four species differing significantly in the relative frequency of the various types of lateral increase. The type of axial increase, megacorallites and agglutinated patches of corallites that developed from normal, undamaged corallites in C. foerstei are species specific. In all species, cyclic fluctuations in the tabularial area of corallites are considered to be annual, and the variable growth rates within colonies and species are attributed to differences in astogenetic stages or environmental conditions. Average annual vertical growth was positively correlated with average tabularial area in C. foerstei, C. cf. robusta and C. rubra. Catenipora cf. agglomeratiformis, however, which had the lowest average tabularial area and greatest sensitivity to sediment influx, had a high average growth rate comparable to that of C. rubra, which had the largest average tabularial area. The formation of ranks or lacunae by certain types of lateral increase seems to have been the most effective strategy for maintaining and/or expanding the colony growth surface in all four species, and was most common in C. cf. agglomeratiformis. A reptant growth pattern, characterized by creeping ranks, permitted effective recovery of damaged parts as well as quick formation of new ranks or lacunae. The growth surface of these species was situated near the sediment–water interface. □Growth characteristics, intraspecific variation, interspecific variation, palaeobiology, tabulate corals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".