MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102262153 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0803

A mixed-age classed ‘pelycosaur’ aggregation from South Africa: earliest evidence of parental care in amniotes?

2007· article· en· W2102262153 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer Botha, Sean P. Modesto

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsJuvenileExtant taxonPermianPaternal careBiologyDorsumEcologyEvolutionary biologyAnatomyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Living species of mammals, crocodiles and most species of birds exhibit parental care, but evidence of this behaviour is extremely rare in the fossil record. Here, we present a new specimen of varanopid 'pelycosaur' from the Middle Permian of South Africa. The specimen is an aggregation, consisting of five articulated individuals preserved in undisturbed, close, lifelike, dorsal-up, subparallel positions, indicating burial in 'life position'. Two size classes are represented. One is 50% larger than the others, is well ossified, has fused neurocentral sutures and is distinguished by a coat of dermal ossifications that covers the neck and shoulder regions. We regard this individual to be an adult. The remaining four skeletons are considered to be juveniles as they are approximately the same size, are poorly ossified, have open neurocentral sutures and lack dermal ossifications. Aggregates of juvenile amniotes are usually siblings. Extant analogues of adult and juvenile groupings suggest that the adult is one of the parents, leading us to regard the aggregation as a family group. The Late Middle Permian age of the varanopid family predates the previously known oldest fossil evidence of parental care in terrestrial vertebrates by 140 Myr.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations57
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207