First record of varied archosauriforms from the Upper Triassic of India based on isolated teeth, and their biostratigraphic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new rich and varied assemblage of archosauriform teeth is reported from the Upper Triassic Tiki Formation of India. Twelve morphotypes are identified based on their distinctive morphology, crown proportions, nature of serrations/denticles and serration density. Morphotypes I and II show similarity with that of Galtonia and Protecovasaurus, respectively, whereas morphotypes III–VI have low, subtriangular or leaf-shaped, asymmetrical, labiolingually compressed crowns with lenticular-subcircular bases and are diagnosed as belonging to different indeterminate archosauriforms. Morphotype VII shows similarity with aetosaur teeth, whereas morphotypes VIII–XII are ziphodont teeth having high, cylindrical, recurved crown with labiolingual compression, serrated carinae and subrectangular serrations, and are theropod-like. Variation in dental histology is noted between these morphotypes based on extent of pulp cavity, dentinal tubules and von Ebner lines of incremental growth. In multivariate analyses, there is considerable overlapping of convex hull polygons with morphospaces of other known archosauriforms such as Protecovasaurus, Crosbysaurus and Tecovasaurus known from the lower Tecovas Formation of the Chinle Group, USA. Such similarity correlates the two horizons despite wide geographic separation, suggesting that the age of the Tiki Formation may be younger than that previously suggested. Based on the known fossil flora and fauna, a mid-late Carnian age is proposed for the Tiki Formation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".