ECOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN <i>RHIPIDOMELLA</i> (ORTHIDES, BRACHIOPODA) AND ITS ENDOSKELETOBIONTS AND PREDATORS FROM THE MIDDLE DEVONIAN DUNDEE FORMATION OF OHIO, UNITED STATES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Only the small (2.0 ± 0.1 cm) orthide brachiopod Rhipidomella in the Middle Devonian Dundee Formation exposed at Whitehouse Quarry, Ohio, preserves evidence of interactions with endoskeletobionts and predators (39.6%, n = 48), as opposed to the slightly larger atrypides, spiriferides, and stropheodonts (n = 245). All traces of predation and boring by other organisms are lacking on such larger brachiopods as strophomenides and spiriferides, which are more often encrusted in Devonian localities of North America—the Silica Shale of Ohio, Hamilton Group of New York, and Cedar Valley Limestone of Iowa. Punctate shells of Rhipidomella preserve interactions with endoskeletobionts and predators, phenomena less common for punctate brachiopods. All traces on Rhipidomella were preserved as endoskeletobionts; if calcified encrusters were present, they likely were lost postmortem. Several Rhipidomella individuals bear partially repaired grooves from parasitic interactions with sinuous, boring organisms, attributed to ctenostome bryozoans. These parasites bored into the shell along the commissure, likely benefiting from the inhalant and exhalant currents produced by the brachiopod, and in some cases, expanded away from the commissure following the host's death. The straight, U-shaped borings in one Rhipidomella specimen with boreholes are similar in morphology to Caulostrepsis traces that occurred with their tubes opening along the margins of a modern brachiopod. Other endoskeletobiont traces likely formed on the postmortem shells of Rhipidomella. Predation repair scars are present on two specimens, indicating the presence of predators and the survival of some Rhipidomella individuals from durophagy. No specimens contain evidence of drilling predators.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".