Morphometrics and paleoecology of<i>Catenipora</i>(Tabulata) from the Xiazhen Formation (Upper Ordovician), Zhuzhai, South China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cateniporais one of the most common tabulate coral genera occurring in various lithofacies in the Upper Ordovician Xiazhen Formation at Zhuzhai in South China. A combination of traditional multivariate analysis and geometric morphometrics is applied to a large number of specimens to distinguish and identify species. Based on three major principal components extracted from 11 morphological characters, three major groups as determined by the cluster-analysis dendrogram are considered to be morphospecies. Their validity and distinctiveness are confirmed by discriminant analysis, descriptive statistics, and bivariate plots. Tabularium area and common wall thickness are the most meaningful characters to distinguish the three morphospecies. Geometric morphometrics is adopted to compare the morphospecies with types and/or figured specimens of species previously reported from the vicinity of Zhuzhai. Despite discrepancies in corallite size, principal component analysis and discriminant analysis, as well as consideration of overall morphological characteristics, indicate that the morphospecies representC.zhejiangensisYu in Yu et al., 1963,C.shiyangensisLin and Chow, 1977, andC.dianbiancunensisLin and Chow, 1977. Cateniporaoccurs in seven stratigraphic intervals in the Xiazhen Formation at Zhuzhai, representing a variety of heterogeneous environments. The coralla preservation is variable due to differential compaction; coralla preserved in limestones are commonly intact and in growth position, whereas those in shales are mostly crushed or fragmentary. The size and shape of corallites are considered primarily to be species-specific characters, but are also related to the depositional environments. In all species, morphological characters, including corallite size, septal development, and shape and size of lacunae, show high variability in accordance with lithofacies and stratigraphic position. The intraspecific differences in corallite size at various localities in the Zhuzhai area may indicate responses to local environmental factors, but may also reflect genetic differences if there was limited connection among populations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".