MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319812171 · doi:10.1126/science.adf1622

A Mesozoic fossil lagerstätte from 250.8 million years ago shows a modern-type marine ecosystem

2023· article· en· W4319812171 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Dai, Joshua H.F.L. Davies, Zhiwei Yuan, Arnaud Brayard, Maria Ovtcharova, Guanghui Xu, Xiaokang Liu, Christopher P. A. Smith, Carrie E. Schweitzer, Mingtao Li, Morgann Perrot, Shouyi Jiang, Luyi Miao, Yiran Cao, Jia Yan, Ruoyu Bai, Feng‐Yu Wang, Wei Guo, Huyue Song, Li Tian, Jacopo Dal Corso, Yuting Liu, Daoliang Chu, Haijun Song

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsLagerstätteBiotaAssemblage (archaeology)Extinction eventMesozoicPermianFaunaPaleontologyEcosystemGeologyEarly TriassicMarine ecosystemEcologyExtinction (optical mineralogy)BiologyBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finely preserved fossil assemblages (lagerstätten) provide crucial insights into evolutionary innovations in deep time. We report an exceptionally preserved Early Triassic fossil assemblage, the Guiyang Biota, from the Daye Formation near Guiyang, South China. High-precision uranium-lead dating shows that the age of the Guiyang Biota is 250.83 +0.07/-0.06 million years ago. This is only 1.08 ± 0.08 million years after the severe Permian-Triassic mass extinction, and this assemblage therefore represents the oldest known Mesozoic lagerstätte found so far. The Guiyang Biota comprises at least 12 classes and 19 orders, including diverse fish fauna and malacostracans, revealing a trophically complex marine ecosystem. Therefore, this assemblage demonstrates the rapid rise of modern-type marine ecosystems after the Permian-Triassic mass extinction.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations92
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207