Dung analysis of the East Milford mastodons: dietary and environmental reconstructions from central Nova Scotia at ∼75 ka years BP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To reconstruct a mastodon diet and provide a snapshot view of environmental conditions in eastern Canada prior to the onset of the Wisconsinan glaciation, we analysed the faunal and floral components of dung associated with juvenile mastodon remains from East Milford, Nova Scotia, dated to 74.9 ± 5.0 ka cal BP. The diverse assemblage of pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs, plant macrofossils, and macroinvertebrate remains in the dung suggests that the mastodons lived in a spruce-dominated mixed coniferous–deciduous forest with a strong boreal aspect interspersed with wetlands rich in charophytes, sedges, cattails, bulrushes, and bryophytes. The abundance of spruce needles and birch samaras in the dung sample is consistent with an inferred browsing behaviour, having been reported for other mammutid species previously. The limited diversity and near-absence of coprophilous fungi, such as Sporormiella, in the dung could have an impact on understanding the influence of feeding strategies on the presence of coprophilous taxa in sedimentary records, and thus interpretations of megafaunal abundance. The dung also yielded the earliest known Canadian remains of the bark beetle Polygraphus cf. rufipennis, gemmulae of the freshwater sponge Eunapius cf. fragilis, and loricae of the rotifer Keratella cochlearis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".