Novel adaptation increases resilience in Planktic Foraminifera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What controls the macroevolutionary history of a group: biological interactions (the \say{Red Queen}) or abiotic circumstances like climate, volcanism, or bolide impacts (the \say{Court Jester})? Planktic foraminifera are a small group of single celled marine eukaryotes. They have one of the best fossil records of any group, resolvable to the species level and deposited within relatively continuous deep-sea sections composed sometimes primarily of their skeletal material. It is likely that their morphology corresponds to their ecology, and we use the former as a proxy for the latter. We measured all recognized morphospecies and used a unique metric to examine their morphological complexity and its relationship with diversity. The connection between the subdivision of morphospace/ecospace (complexity) and diversity appears to correspond to the previously observed diversity dependence governing their evolution. At several points in the last 150 Myr lower mean test complexity-per-diversity corresponds to suppressed origination rates, indicating that ecospace is subdivided so much that it could not be further occupied. We find that the occupation of ecospace in planktic foraminifera is unlinked from climate, except for events large enough to cause a complete reorganization (e.g., the Eocene-Oligocene Transition). Similar reorganizations of ecospace occupancy are driven by key adaptations, like the evolution of photosymbiosis. The relationship of ecospace occupation and diversity is more volatile prior to the evolution of photosymbiosis than after, suggesting that this novel adaptation provides added resilience for the group.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".