Comparing predatory drillholes to taphonomic damage from simulated wave action on a modern gastropod
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractMarine drilling predation, in which the predator bores a hole through shelled invertebrate prey, plays a role in the structure of benthic communities. As drilling often leaves the prey shell otherwise undamaged, the resulting holes are also an excellent proxy for drilling predation pressure in the fossil record. Considering that a large number of predation studies focus on drilling predation in the fossil record, it is crucial that we are able to distinguish true drilling predation from taphonomy. The purpose of this study is to determine damage on Olivella biplicata shells, drilled by naticid gastropods, is distinguishable from taphonomically produced damage to these shells. In addition, the potential for preferential breakage due to either the presence or whether absence of a drillhole was investigated. Drilled and non-drilled O. biplicata shells were tumbled to simulate wave action and were checked at intervals to record accumulated damage. Drilled and non-drilled shells do not show a significant difference in damage accumulated while undergoing simulated wave action. Taphonomic damage is unlikely to be mistaken for drilling damage, due to the jagged, irregular appearance of taphonomically produced holes.Keywords:: predationdrillingtaphonomytransportOlivella biplicata AcknowledgementsThis study was supported by an NSERC-USRA awarded to Nikqueta Chojnacki and by an NSERC Discovery Grant to Lindsey Leighton. We thank Patricia Kelley and Greg Dietl for their thoughtful reviews. We would like to thank Chris Schneider for her help with collection and for the loaning of samples. We would also like to thank Emily Stafford for additional help in the field.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 it