The Pliensbachian ammonites of the Algarve Basin (Portugal) and their palaeobiogeographical significance for the “Iberia-Newfoundland” conjugate margins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A review of the Pliensbachian ammonite faunas of the Algarve Basin is given covering their taxonomy, stratigraphy and palaeobiogeography (palaeobiodiversity). This review is based on both an extensive revision of the previously collected and/or published material and on new finds precisely located within the ammonite succession. This new material allows us to clarify the variations within the most abundant species—a new species Reynesocoeloceras elmii nov. sp. is described—and to improve our understanding (palaeobiodiversity, palaeobiogeography and bio- or chrono-stratigraphy) of the two single known Pliensbachian fossiliferous assemblages in the Algarve Basin. The first of these assemblages is relatively diverse and is ascribed to the upper half of the Luridum Subchronozone. The second assemblage is less diversified and probably partly condensed. It is broadly attributed to the upper half of the Stokesi Subchronozone. Despite the newly collected ammonites and extensive prospecting, our knowledge of the Pliensbachian ammonite faunas of the Algarve remains fragmentary. Therefore, it is difficult to propose an incontrovertible extensive palaeobiogeographical interpretation for these faunas, but it seems that Tethyan (Mediterranean) affinities were of major importance whereas there were probably no NW European influences via the Lusitanian Basin.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".