Late Pleistocene beetle faunas of Beringia: where east met west
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim To examine the issue of Beringian steppe‐tundra from an entomological standpoint, using fossil beetle data collected from late Pleistocene sites. Location North‐eastern Siberia (Western Beringia), the Bering Land Bridge (Central Beringia), and Alaska and the Yukon Territory (Eastern Beringia). Methods Analysis of habitat preferences of beetle species found in fossil assemblages, leading to classification of major habitat types characterized by the faunal assemblages. Results Fossil beetle assemblages indicative of steppe‐tundra are found mainly in the interior regions of Eastern Beringia, whereas these assemblages dominate nearly all late Pleistocene fossil sites in Western Beringia. Eastern Beringian faunas contain a much larger proportion of mesic to hygrophilous species and very few arid‐habitat species. In contrast to this, the habitat requirements of the Western Beringian faunas are more evenly spread across the moisture spectrum. Main conclusions The taxonomic patterns of the two sets of fossil assemblages are remarkably different. Eastern Beringian faunal assemblages contain substantial numbers of mesic tundra and riparian rove beetles (Staphylinidae); this element is almost entirely lacking in the Western Beringian fossil assemblages. Taphonomic bias tends to overemphasize moisture‐loving species at the expense of dry, upland species in the fossil record. Both Western and Eastern Beringian landscapes undoubtedly contained mosaics of habitats ranging from dry uplands (steppe‐tundra) through mesic tundra to bogs and riparian corridors.
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 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) | 0.012 | 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 teacher head, 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".