MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A NEW LATE CRETACEOUS MACROSEMIID FISH (NEOPTERYGII, HALECOSTOMI) FROM MOROCCO, WITH TEMPORAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE EXTENSIONS FOR THE FAMILY

2009· article· en· W2037777915 on OpenAlexaff
Alison M. Murray, Mark V. H. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenuePalaeontology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCretaceousPaleontologyCenomanianActinopterygiiRange (aeronautics)AptianGenusDorsal finFish <Actinopterygii>GeologyMesozoicGeographyStructural basinBiologyZoologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: A recent collection of actinopterygian fossil fishes from a previously unreported locality in the Cenomanian or Turonian of southeastern Morocco includes a single specimen of a macrosemiid fish. Macrosemiids are more common in Jurassic and Early Cretaceous deposits, with the previously known range of the family being Late Triassic through Aptian or Albian. This discovery therefore extends the temporal range of the family into the Late Cretaceous. Moreover, macrosemiids had not previously been reported from northern Africa or the Moroccan area of the Tethys basin; therefore, this fossil also increases the geographical range of the family. The Moroccan macrosemiid is described in a new genus and species, Agoultichthys chattertoni. A phylogenetic analysis places it basal to all other genera of the family with the exception of Notagogus. Diagnostic characters of the new species include the high number of scales laterally along the body and the greater number of dorsal fin rays than in other members of the family.

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)0.000
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalaeontologySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207