MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101260239 · doi:10.1002/ajpa.1075

Infant feeding and weaning practices in Roman Egypt

2001· article· en· W2101260239 on OpenAlexaff
Tosha L. Dupras, Henry P. Schwarcz, Scott I. Fairgrieve

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physical Anthropology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeaningInfant feedingAnimal scienceMedicinePediatricsBreast feedingBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current knowledge of infant feeding and weaning practices during the Roman period in Egypt is limited to scanty documentary and iconographic evidence. Stable nitrogen and carbon isotope analysis provides another avenue to explore this question. A sample of 49 infant and juvenile human skeletal remains from the Kellis 2 cemetery in the Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt, was used to determine patterns of infant feeding and weaning. delta(15)N values indicate that supplementary foods were introduced at around 6 months of age, and that weaning was complete by 3 years of age. By 6 months of age, delta(13)C values become increasingly enriched over adult values, and reach peak enrichment at approximately 1.5 years of age. Beyond this age, delta(13)C gradually declines to approach adult values. This enrichment in infant delta(13)C values is indicative of consumption of (13)C-enriched supplementary foods. Based on isotopic study of faunal and botanical remains from the ancient village of Kellis, we conclude that at approximately 6 months of age, infants were fed milk of goat and/or cow.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations236
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physical AnthropologySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207