MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Silurian trilobite alpha diversity and the end-Ordovician mass extinction

2000· article· en· W2032223644 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan M. Adrain, Stephen R. Westrop, Brian D. E. Chatterton, Lars Ramsköld

Bibliographic record

VenuePaleobiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrilobiteOrdovicianExtinction eventExtinction (optical mineralogy)PaleontologyLaurentiaGamma diversityCladeSpecies richnessAlpha diversityGeologyPaleozoicEcologyDiversity (politics)Beta diversityGeographyBiologyPhylogeneticsBiological dispersalDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the end-Ordovician extinction, global clade diversity of Silurian trilobites dropped to about half of Ordovician levels. Although clade diversity failed to recover, this extinction had surprisingly little long-term impact on the number of trilobite species that occupied local habitats (alpha diversity). A new compilation of data from Laurentia and other continents indicates that Silurian trilobite alpha diversities in all major environments were comparable to those of the Late Cambrian and Ordovician; shallow subtidal diversity reached an all-time high during the Late Ordovician. The profound differences in patterns at local and global levels demonstrate the necessity for a hierarchical approach to analyses of diversity. Factors governing global clade diversity are lodged at hierarchical levels beyond those controlling local species richness and must be sought in studies of between-habitat (beta) or geographic (gamma) diversity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations85
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaleobiologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207