MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017272463 · doi:10.2478/acpa-2014-0002

Morphology, affinities and phytogeographic history of Porosia Hickey in the Cretaceous and Paleocene of North America and Asia

2014· article· en· W2017272463 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven R. Manchester, Tatyana M. Kodrul

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Palaeobotanica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJohns Hopkins UniversityRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCretaceousPaleontologyGeologyPerianthGondwanaBiologyEcologyPollenTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Morphology and anatomy of the extinct angiosperm fruit, Porosia verrucosa (Lesqueruex) Hickey, are documented in detail based on various modes of preservation including molds, casts, and permineralizations from more than seventy localities in the late Cretaceous and Paleocene. The fruits are schizocarpic with paired unilocular, single-seeded mericarps seated on a prominent gynophore with an hypogynous perianth borne on a long pedicel. The most distinctive feature of these fruits is the regularly spaced cylindrical intrusions over the surface of the endocarp. These are interpreted to represent oil cavities similar to those common in the fruits of extant Rutaceae. The oldest known occurrences of P. verrucosa are from the Late Cretaceous (Campanian to Maastrichtian) of western North America, but the genus traversed Beringia and became widespread in the Paleocene both in Asia (Kazakhstan, Amur Region, and Koryak Highlands), and North America (Montana, North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Alberta, Saskatchewan). It extended to the late Paleocene in the Rocky Mountain and Great Plains region, and appears to have become extinct near the Paleocene-Eocene boundary.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PalaeobotanicaSame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207