MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2893299626 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2018-0139

Taphonomy of Yellow-legged Gull (<i>Larus michahellis</i>) pellets from the Chafarinas islands (Spain)

2018· article· en· W2893299626 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Émilie Guillaud, Arturo Morales Muñiz, Eufrasia Roselló Izquierdo, Philippe Béarez

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMuséum National d'Histoire NaturelleMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsArchipelagoBiologyFisheryFish bonePredationZoologyGenusMediterranean seaKey (lock)FishingTaphonomyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyMediterranean climate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish are consumed by many predators in addition to humans. Identifying the agent responsible for an archaeological fish bone accumulation is a crucial yet far from straightforward task in the absence of diagnostic criteria. It is for this reason that exploring the features of fish bone collections produced by animals constitutes a key issue of archaeozoological research. In this paper, one such study is presented for the Yellow-legged Gull (Larus michahellis J.F. Naumann, 1840). A total of 48 pellets were collected in a colony of the species on two islands of the Chafarinas archipelago (Mediterranean Sea). The analyses demonstrate that fish remains, represented by 13 species and 1 genus, made up 93% of the 2789 identified remains. Most assemblages were dominated by the European pilchard (Sardina pilchardus (Walbaum, 1792)). Our study indicates that digestive processes modify skeletal elements through abrasion and fragmentation. Based on the modifications that were recorded, a set of diagnostic criteria is proposed to serve as proxies for spotting fish bone deposits produced by Yellow-legged Gulls on archaeological assemblages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicIdentification and Quantification in Food→French-language works237,207→