Pronghorn (<i>Antilocapra americana</i>) enamel phosphate δ<sup>18</sup>O values reflect climate seasonality: Implications for paleoclimate reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stable oxygen isotope (δ18O) compositions from vertebrate tooth enamel are widely used as biogeochemical proxies for paleoclimate. However, the utility of enamel oxygen isotope values for environmental reconstruction varies among species. Herein, we evaluate the use of stable oxygen isotope compositions from pronghorn (Antilocapra americana Gray, 1866) enamel for reconstructing paleoclimate seasonality, an elusive but important parameter for understanding past ecosystems. We serially sampled the lower third molars of recent adult pronghorn from Wyoming for δ18O in phosphate (δ18OPO4) and compared patterns to interpolated and measured yearly variation in environmental waters as well as from sagebrush leaves, lakes, and rivers (δ18Ow). As expected, the oxygen isotope compositions of phosphate from pronghorn enamel are enriched in 18O relative to environmental waters. For a more direct comparison, we converted δ18Ow values into expected δ18OPO4* values (δ18OW‐PO4*). Pronghorn δ18OPO4 values from tooth enamel record nearly the full amplitude of seasonal variation from Wyoming δ18OW‐PO4* values. Furthermore, pronghorn enamel δ18OPO4 values are more similar to modeled δ18OW‐PO4* values from plant leaf waters than meteoric waters, suggesting that they obtain much of their water from evaporated plant waters. Collectively, our findings establish that seasonality in source water is reliably reflected in pronghorn enamel, providing the basis for exploring changes in the amplitude of seasonality of ancient climates. As a preliminary test, we sampled historical pronghorn specimens (1720 ± 100 AD), which show a mean decrease (a shift to lower values) of 1–2‰ in δ18OPO4 compared to the modern specimens. They also exhibit an increase in the δ18O amplitude, representing an increase in seasonality. We suggest that the cooler mean annual and summer temperatures typical of the 18th century, as well as enhanced periods of drought, drove differences among the modern and historical pronghorn, further establishing pronghorn enamel as excellent sources of paleoclimate proxy data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".