MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Silurian cooksonias from dolostones of north-eastern North America

2004· article· en· W2076747603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dianne S. Edwards, Harlan P. Banks, Samuel J. Ciurca, Richard S. Laub

Bibliographic record

VenueBotanical Journal of the Linnean Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPennsylvanianSporangiumPaleontologyDevonianBiologyTaphonomyBiostratigraphyGondwanaPaleozoicGross morphologyGeologyAnatomySpore

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New specimens of Cooksonia and Hostinella are described from the Bertie Group of Ontario and New York State, which is dated by faunas as latest Silurian (Přídolí). The rare plant fossils are unusual in that they are preserved in fine-grained, slightly argillaceous dolostones (‘waterlime’) rather than clastic rocks. At least two species of Cooksonia are present, one with ± globular sporangial morphology close to C. hemisphaerica Lang. Those with ellipsoidal/discoidal sporangia are compared with C. pertoni Lang, C. paranensis Gerrienne et al. and C. bohemica Schweitzer, the latter represented by a single specimen from the Přídolí of the Czech Republic. However, the paucity of specimens, which prevents assessment of taphonomic influences on shape, combined with the absence of any anatomical features and the gross morphological simplicity of the fossils, precludes specific assignment. Specimens of Hostinella include one in which apices and a lateral basal structure resembling a root are preserved. It is concluded that the Laurentian assemblage of Ontario and New York State is less diverse and disparate than coeval assemblages, which are also preserved in marine rocks. Its preservation in limestones may have been facilitated by the hypersalinity inferred from various sedimentary features, which would restrict the activity of many decomposers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanical Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207