MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219841968 · doi:10.1674/0003-0031-163.2.423

A Late Pleistocene Bird Community at the Northern Edge of the Tropics in Sonora, Mexico

2010· article· en· W2219841968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David W. Steadman, Jim I. Mead

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Midland Naturalist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyGeographyBiologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently collected fossils from the late Pleistocene (Rancholabrean North American Land Mammal Age) locality at Térapa, Sonora, México, represent 31 species of non-passerine birds. Twenty-three of the species (74%) are aquatic (grebes, pelican, cormorant, herons, ibis, stork, geese, ducks, rails), reflecting the lacustrine environment (marsh, lake) in which the fossils accumulated. The eight non-aquatic species (harrier, kite, two eagles, caracara, quail, killdeer and owl) suggest habitats from grassland to open woodland to desertscrub to tropical thornscrub. Three species are certainly extinct (the duck Anabernicula cf. A. oregonensis, eagle Buteogallus (Wetmoregyps) daggetti and owl Strix brea). Only the owl has been recorded previously in Sonora. A species of large stork (Ciconiidae sp., genus uncertain) probably is extinct as well. Previously unrecorded in Sonora is a kite Ictinia sp. Among the 26 other species (all extant), four have no modern records within 100 km of Térapa (the ibis Plegadis cf. P. chihi, Canada Goose Branta canadensis, Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus and Purple Gallinule Porphyrio martinicus). Although the non-passerine fossil bird community at Térapa is dominated by aquatic species with broad latitudinal and longitudinal ranges, five of the eight species of landbirds do not occur north of the southwestern U.S. or northern México. The subtropical biogeographic affinities of the Térapa birds agree with those suggested for the associated reptile and mammal fossils.

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 score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
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

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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Midland NaturalistSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207