MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

UNIQUE MANIRAPTORAN EGG CLUTCH FROM THE UPPER CRETACEOUS TWO MEDICINE FORMATION OF MONTANA REVEALS THEROPOD NESTING BEHAVIOUR

2008· article· en· W2065975036 on OpenAlexaff
Darla K. Zelenitsky, François Therrien

Bibliographic record

VenuePalaeontology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Tyrrell MuseumUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)CretaceousClutchAvian clutch sizeEggshellNesting (process)PaleontologyGeologyBiologyZoologyEcologyReproductionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Egg clutches of non‐avian maniraptoran theropods (Dinosauria) are rare, particularly in North America where those of Troodon formosus are the only maniraptoran clutches known. Here we describe a new partial maniraptoran clutch and nesting trace referred to Montanoolithus strongorum oogen. et oosp. nov. (Montanoolithidae oofam. nov.), from the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine Formation of Montana. Based on a cladistic analysis of reproductive traits, we infer that this clutch belonged either to a caenagnathid or to a dromaeosaurid, which makes it the first clutch known of either taxon. This specimen preserves impressions and eggshell fragments of at least five eggs on a nest structure. The eggs are asymmetrical, paired, and lay radially in a ring configuration on the sloped sides of a bioturbated, flat‐topped sandstone mound. Geology of the locality indicates the female nested in a poorly‐vegetated area of freshly deposited sand, possibly near an active river channel. This clutch reveals that the egg‐layer of Montanoolithus strongorum had a unique suite of reproductive characteristics and nesting behaviours among maniraptorans.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalaeontologySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207