MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4364379136 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-32557-w

Morphological and organic spectroscopic studies of a 44-million-year-old leaf beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in amber with endogenous remains of chitin

2023· article· en· W4364379136 on OpenAlexafffund
Jerit Mitchell, Ryan C. McKellar, Mauricio Barbi, Ian M. Coulson, Andris Bukejs

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsRoyal Saskatchewan MuseumUniversity of Regina
FundersMitacsUniversity of SaskatchewanCanadian Light Source
KeywordsChitinLeaf beetleBotanyBiologyLarvaBiochemistryChitosan

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study details the quality of preservation of amber deposits in the Eocene. Through Baltic amber crack-out studies using Synchrotron Micro-Computed Tomography and Scanning Electron Microscopy it was found that the cuticle of a specimen of leaf beetle (Crepidodera tertiotertiaria (Alticini: Galerucinae: Chrysomelidae)) is exceptionally well preserved. Spectroscopic analysis using Synchrotron Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy suggests presence of degraded [Formula: see text]-chitin in multiple areas of the cuticle, and Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy supports the presence of organic preservation. This remarkable preservation is likely the result of several factors such as the favourable antimicrobial and physical shielding properties of Baltic amber as compared to other depositional media, coupled to rapid dehydration of the beetle early in its taphonomic process. We provide evidence that crack-out studies of amber inclusions, although inherently destructive of fossils, are an underutilised method for probing exceptional preservation in deep time.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207