Anomalous <sup>13</sup> C enrichment in Mesozoic vertebrate enamel reflects environmental conditions in a “vanished world” and not a unique dietary physiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Biogeochemical analyses of organisms’ tissues provide direct proxies for diets, behaviors, and environmental interactions that have proven invaluable for studies of extant and extinct species. Applying these to Cretaceous ecosystems has at times produced anomalous results, however, as dinosaurs preserve unusually positive stable carbon isotope compositions relative to extant C 3 -feeding vertebrates. This has been hypothesized to be a unique property of dinosaur dietary physiology, with potential significance for our interpretations of their paleobiology. We test that hypothesis through multi-taxic stable carbon isotope analyses of a spatiotemporally constrained locality in the Late Cretaceous of Canada, and compare the results to a modern near-analogue environment in Louisiana. The stable carbon isotope anomaly is present in all sampled fossil vertebrates, dinosaur or not. This suggests another more widespread factor is responsible. Examinations of diagenetic effects suggest that, where present, they are insufficient to explain the isotope anomaly. The isotope anomaly is therefore not primarily the result of a unique dietary physiology of dinosaurs, but rather a mix of factors impacting all taxa, such as environmental and/or source-diet differences. Our study underscores the importance of multi-taxic samples from spatiotemporally constrained localities in testing hypotheses of extinct organisms and ecosystems, and in the use of modern data to “ground truth” when evaluating analogue versus non-analogue conditions in greenhouse paleoecosystems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".