MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319038397 · doi:10.1017/s0016756822001248

The megathermal ant genus <i>Gesomyrmex</i> (Formicidae: Formicinae), palaeoindicator of wide latitudinal biome homogeneity during the PETM

2023· article· en· W4319038397 on OpenAlexaff
Cédric Aria, Corentin Jouault, Vincent Perrichot, André Nel

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Magazine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomeCenozoicGenusFormicinaeBiodiversityPaleontologyEcologyPaleosolPhanerozoicBiologyFossil RecordEcosystemStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Palaeocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) is one of the most important Cenozoic climatic events shaping modern biodiversity, yet reconstructions of its palaeobiomes remain controversial. Here we describe Gesomyrmex gallicus sp. nov., a new, extinct species of the ant genus Gesomyrmex Mayr, 1868, based on minor and major workers preserved in the early Eocene amber of Oise, France. Although there are only seven known extant species in the genus, all confined to warm and humid forests of SE Asia, the fossil record of Gesomyrmex indicates that the genus once radiated across Eurasia. The new species therefore provides direct evidence that this radiation likely co-occurred with the PETM. This observation constrains palaeoclimatic reconstructions of the Early Eocene by requiring the presence of an extensive, homogeneous and interconnected rainforest-like biome across palaeo-Eurasia, a scenario otherwise corroborated by pollen assemblages. The phases of regression of warm and humid forests and the widening of dry biomes probably occurred later during the Eocene, in between hyperthermals, and were probably less extensive than some computer models predicted.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological MagazineSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207