Assemblage-level structure in Morrison Formation dinosaurs, Western Interior, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation is both geographically extensive and well-sampled, making it an ideal candidate for biogeographic analysis at both coarse and finer scales. Historically, however, this has not translated into a consensus on patterns of ecological structure and connectivity, particularly with regard to the characteristic dinosaur faunas. Here, we use both traditional (genus richness, alpha and beta diversity) and bipartite network-based (biogeographic connectivity, local endemism, and average occurrence) measures to examine patterns of structure on a per-locality basis. Given the broad geographic range of the formation, we subdivide the Morrison Formation into four discrete regions based roughly on latitude and lithology—north (Montana, South Dakota, and northern Wyoming), west (Utah and western Colorado), east (central and eastern Colorado and southern Wyoming), and south (Arizona, New Mexico and Oklahoma). Further investigation revealed many coeval sites (ca. 152 Ma) in the east and west regions. Presence-absence data were also compared using network analysis to determine the presence and content of discrete subassemblages within the larger region-level assemblages. Based on our results, we favor reconstructions of the Morrison Formation as a ‘mosaic’ type environment over most of its depositional history, with patches of open environments interspersed with more closed, forested regions. is is suggested by relatively low rates of local endemism (patches are consistent in plant and animal structure) and connectivity across the majority of the formation, as well as the recovery of three non-overlapping assemblages dominated by dierent guilds of herbivorous dinosaurs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".