MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220838638 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-29246-z

The Chengjiang Biota inhabited a deltaic environment

2022· article· en· W4220838638 on OpenAlexafffund
Farid Saleh, Changshi Qi, Luís A. Buatois, M. Gabriela Mángano, Maximiliano Paz, Romain Vaucher, Quan-feng Zheng, Xianguang Hou, Sarah E. Gabbott, Xiaoya Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersState Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and StratigraphyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsBiotaGeologyPhanerozoicEcologyOceanographySedimentary depositional environmentPaleontologyCenozoicBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chengjiang Biota is the earliest Phanerozoic soft-bodied fossil assemblage offering the most complete snapshot of Earth's initial diversification, the Cambrian Explosion. Although palaeobiologic aspects of this biota are well understood, the precise sedimentary environment inhabited by this biota remains debated. Herein, we examine a non-weathered core from the Yu'anshan Formation including the interval preserving the Chengjiang Biota. Our data indicate that the succession was deposited as part of a delta influenced by storm floods (i.e., produced by upstream river floods resulting from ocean storms). Most Chengjiang animals lived in an oxygen and nutrient-rich delta front environment in which unstable salinity and high sedimentation rates were the main stressors. This unexpected finding allows for sophisticated ecological comparisons with other Burgess Shale-type deposits and emphasizes that the long-held view of Burgess Shale-type faunas as snapshots of stable distal shelf and slope communities needs to be revised based on recent sedimentologic advances.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207