MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150076507 · doi:10.1002/jmor.10585

Structure of ivory

2007· article· en· W2150076507 on OpenAlex
Michael Locke

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Morphology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentinal TubuleAnatomyDentinBiologyHippopotamusProboscideaMaterials scienceComposite materialPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Profiles with all orientations have been used to visualize the 3D structure of ivory from tusks of elephant, mammoth, walrus, hippopotamus, pig (bush, boar, and warthog), sperm whale, killer whale, and narwhal. Polished, forming, fractured, aged, and stained surfaces were prepared for microscopy using epi-illumination. Tusks have a minor peripheral component, the cementum, a soft derivative of the enamel layer, and a main core of dentine=ivory. The dentine is composed of a matrix of particles 5-20 microm in diameter in a ground substance containing dentinal tubules about 5 microm in diameter with a center to center spacing of 10-20 microm. Dentinal tubules may be straight (most) or curly (pigs). The main findings relate to the way that dentinal tubules align in sheets to form microlaminae in the length of the tusk. Microlaminae are sheets of laterally aligned dentinal tubules. They are axial but may be radial (most), angled to the forming face (pigs and hippopotamus canines), or radial but helical (narwhals). Within the microlaminae the dentinal tubules may be radial, angled to the axis (whales, walrus, and pigs), or may change their orientation from one microlamina to the next in helicoids (canines of hippopotamuses, incisors of proboscidea). In the nonbanded, featureless ivories from the hippopotamus incisors, the dentinal tubules form radial microlamina from which the arrangements in other ivories can be derived. In the canines of hippopotamuses and incisors of proboscidea, the dentinal tubule orientation changes incrementally from one microlamina to the next in a helicoid, a stack of dentinal tubules that change their orientation by 180 degrees anticlockwise. Dentinal tubules having different orientations are laid down concurrently, not layer by layer as in most examples of helicoidal architecture (e.g., insect cuticle). In proboscidean ivory, the microlaminae are radial, normal to the banding of growth layers marking the plane of deposition. They form radial segments with each 180 degrees turn in the orientation of their constituent dentinal tubules. Below the cementum they are almost complete 180 degrees helicoids, but nearer to the core they become narrower with the loss of radially oriented dentinal tubules. These truncated helicoidal patterns appear in longitudinal profile as VVVV feather patterns rather than intersection intersection intersection intersection, each V or intersection being the side view of a partial or complete helicoid. The Schreger pattern in proboscidean ivory consists of these helicoids divided tangentially into columns in the length of the tusk. Narwhals have the most abundant matrix particles with their radial/helical dentinal tubules having a twist opposite to that in the cementum.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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