MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2378431073

NEW MATERIAL OF FOSSIL PLANTS FROM THE EARLY CRETACEOUS MULING FORMATION OF THE JIXI BASIN, EASTERN HEILONGJIANG PROVINCE, CHINA

2003· article· en· W2378431073 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yang Xiao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlora (microbiology)CretaceousSubtropicsAptianPaleontologyChinaDeciduousGeographyBotanyEcologyGeologyBiologyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Early Cretaceous flora from the Muling Formation of the Jixi Basin, Heilongjiang Province, Northeast China comprises 38 species, so far as known, belonging to 31 genera of high plants, of which 23 species of 22 genera are described here. The angiospermous leaves Asiatefolium elegans and Dicotylophyllum sp. are found in the Muling Formation for the first time. Cuticles of Tyrmia sp., Nilssoniopteris sp., Ginkgoites cf. sibirica, Sphenobaiera sp., Elatocladus manchurica are studied with scanning electron microscope (SEM). The flora is mainly composed of leptosporangiate ferns and gymnosperms. Most of them occurred in the Lower Cretaceous. The geological age of the Muling Formation and its flora may be Barremian and probably middle Barremian early Aptian. No representatives of gymnosperms with needle like leaves have been found in this flora. The occurrence of abundant tropical or subtropical type ferns implies a warm and humid climate dominating over the area. On the other hand, some deciduous gymnosperms including Ginkgoales, and the presence of growth rings in the fossil secondary wood, indicate seasonal changes. Paleophytogeographically, the flora belongs to the Early Cretaceous Siberian or Canada Siberian province.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207