MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313563857 · doi:10.2475/08.2022.01

The Assabet barcode: Mesoproterozoic detrital zircons in Neoproterozoic strata from Mauritania, West Africa

2022· article· en· W4313563857 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dwight C. Bradley, David A.D. Evans, Paul O’Sullivan, Cliff D. Taylor, B. M. Eglington

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies Worldwide
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCratonZirconGeologyRodiniaGeochemistryPaleontologyPopulationSupercontinentTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detrital zircon data are reported from Mesoproterozoic to Ordovician strata from two tectonic domains in Mauritania: 14 samples from the Taoudeni Basin of the West African Craton and 15 samples from the Mauritanide orogen. Taoudeni Basin samples show four sequential, distinctive detrital zircon age distributions, which we refer to as “barcodes”. From old to young these are the Char, Assabet, Téniagouri, and Oujeft barcodes, each named for a constituent stratigraphic unit. Zircon age maxima are as follows, with the dominant ones in italics. The Char barcode, from Mesoproterozoic (ca. 1100 Ma) strata including the Char Group, yielded zircon age maxima at 2941, 2871, 2703, 2447, 2076, and 2041 Ma, all potentially traceable to sources in the West African Craton. The Assabet barcode is from strata, including the eponymous Assabet el Hassiane Group, that were deposited between ca. 883 and ca. 570 Ma; it has age maxima at 2137, 2053, 1769, 1510, 1212, 1021, and 936 Ma and a pronounced minimum during Geon 16 (1699–1600 Ma). The Assabet9s Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic zircons cannot have come from the West African Craton or any of its surrounding orogens. The Téniagouri barcode, which takes its name from the Téniagouri Group, was deposited at ca. 569 Ma; it has dominant maxima at 1983, 1872, 1522, 1215, 1109, 988, and 601 Ma and resembles the Assabet barcode but with the addition of the youngest population. The Oujeft barcode, named for the Oujeft Group, is from strata deposited between 541 or slightly earlier and 444 Ma or younger, has age maxima at 2124, 2053, 1197, 624 and 579 Ma. The Téniagouri and Oujeft barcodes record input from Pan-African orogens. In the Mauritanide orogen, most of the metasedimentary rock units that were sampled yielded detrital zircon age spectra that match one of the Taoudeni Basin barcodes. These results imply new depositional age constraints based on barcode correlation and suggest affinities between Mauritanide strata and the West African Craton. Detrital zircon age distributions that broadly resemble the Assabet barcode occur in the Neoproterozoic of Morocco, Ghana, Greece, Russia, Brazil, and, in the Appalachian orogen of Canada and the United States, Avalonia and Ganderia. The recent Rodinia reconstruction of Evans (2021) restores these far-flung localities to a more compact area, with Avalonia, Ganderia, and other peri-Gondwanan terranes occupying an oblong area between Amazonia, Laurentia, Baltica, and West Africa. Our preferred explanation is that most of these places received detritus via the same continent-scale fluvial system as the West African craton. Among the craton9s nearest Rodinia neighbors in the Evans (2021) reconstruction for 900 Ma, Amazonia has known igneous rocks corresponding to all of the major Assabet age populations, and also a lull, though not a complete magmatic gap, during Geon 16. This is consistent with overall north-directed paleocurrents in the Assabet El Hassiane Group and its correlatives on the West African Craton.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of ScienceSame topicGeological and Geophysical Studies WorldwideFrench-language works237,207