Two new Palaeocene osteoglossomorphs from Canada, with a reassessment of the relationships of the genus †Joffrichthys, and analysis of diversity from articulated versus microfossil material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single block containing five articulated osteoglossomorphs was recovered from the Paskapoo Formation of southern Alberta, during development of a residential community in Calgary. Two of the specimens represent a new species of †Joffrichthys, and the other three represent a new genus and species of osteoglossomorph. The discovery of a new species of †Joffrichthys led us to re-examine the type species and to recode many of the characters that have been used in phylogenetic analyses. In particular, we interpret the caudal skeleton of †Joffrichthys to have 16 branched principal rays, not 15, which indicates this genus does not belong in Osteoglossiformes, and removes it from the osteoglossid/heterotidine affiliations previously reported. We assessed the relationships of the two new taxa using a modified data matrix including new outgroups and corrected data, with and without the inclusion of †Ostariostoma. Our results show that †Joffrichthys is a basal member of the superorder, and not a member of the Heterotidinae, but the other new taxon is left incertae sedis in the superorder. We also provide data on the early history of osteoglossomorphs in North America provided by isolated elements from Cretaceous and Palaeocene microfossil sites that complement and supplement that provided by articulated specimens.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".