Bioerosion pattern in a nearshore setting as a tool to disentangle multiphase transgressive episodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palaeoichnology is known to be a powerful tool for the characterisation of unconformity surfaces. In a Neogene post-orogenic basin of the Betic domain (Alicante, SE Spain), a complex Miocene transgressive event on an exposed Eocene succession is recorded. The resulting unconformity surface as well as the overlying beds resulting from the establishment of a nearshore environment are ichnologically and palaeoecologically analysed. Different boring structures related to the Entobia ichnofacies were observed on a variety of substrates, including i) the rocky Eocene substrate, ii) Tortonian conglomerates and breccias , iii) oyster and coral patches (mainly represented by Tarbellastraea ). Boring structures are mainly represented by Gastrochaenolites , Entobia and, more rarely, Trypanites and Spirolites ? Different colonization patterns were identified, including truncated Gastrochaenolites and Entobia that are extensively developed on the Eocene rockground, small-sized Entobia , and superficial bioerosion on conglomerates and breccias , and Gastrochaenolites hospitium on corals; a selective colonization of G. hospitium was observed, with Tarbellastraea much more intensively bioeroded than Porites . Finally, the integration of stratigraphic, palaeoecological and ichnological data allowed for the identification of three different phases in the Miocene transgression: i) slow transgression with the consequent colonization of the Eocene rockground, the production of a wide planar surface and the truncated Gastrochaenolites - Entobia assemblage; ii) the breaking of this uniform coastal setting into areas characterized by different hydrodynamics, with coral development where turbulence was higher; this second phase was of limited temporal extension, with a limited accommodation space; iii) a final phase characterized by a new transgressive pulse leading to the establishment firstly of a restricted inner platform and secondarily of a slightly deeper sandy platform; in this phase, bioerosion was limited to shells, while soft- and loose-ground burrows as Ophiomorpha developed within the substrate.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".