MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012028462 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15243-7

The base of the Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone, Karoo Basin, predates the end-Permian marine extinction

2020· article· en· W3012028462 on OpenAlexaff
Robert A. Gastaldo, Sandra L. Kamo, Johann Neveling, J. W. Geissman, Cindy V. Looy, Anna M. Martini

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersColby CollegeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPermianGeologyPaleontologyExtinction eventStructural basinPermian–Triassic extinction eventBiozoneExtinction (optical mineralogy)ZirconAssemblage (archaeology)Biological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current model for the end-Permian terrestrial ecosystem crisis holds that systematic loss exhibited by an abrupt turnover from the Daptocephalus to the Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone (AZ; Karoo Basin, South Africa) is time equivalent with the marine Permian-Triassic boundary (PTB). The marine event began at 251.941 ± 0.037 Ma, with the PTB placed at 251.902 ± 0.024 Ma (2σ). Radio-isotopic dates over this interval in the Karoo Basin were limited to one high resolution ash-fall deposit in the upper Daptocephalus AZ (253.48 ± 0.15 (2σ) Ma) with no similar age constraints for the overlying biozone. Here, we present the first U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS zircon age (252.24 ± 0.11 (2σ) Ma) from a pristine ash-fall deposit in the Karoo Lystrosaurus AZ. This date confirms that the lower exposures of the Lystrosaurus AZ are of latest Permian age and that the purported turnover in the basin preceded the end-Permian marine event by over 300 ka, thus refuting the previously used stratigraphic marker for terrestrial end-Permian extinction.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations104
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207