New ichnospecies and redescription of <i>Caedichnus</i> Stafford et al., 2015, traces indicative of durophagous predation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predation traces on marine shelled prey are informative and widely utilized indicators of predatory attacks in the scientific literature. Most of these traces remain undescribed and unnamed, making it difficult to identify and quantify predatory behaviour in the fossil record. Two new ichnospecies, Caedichnus cisus and Caedichnus lunaris, have been described and erected into the emended ichnogenus Caedichnus, assigned to the ichnofamily Belichnidae (Wisshak et al., Citation2019), and a previously proposed synonymy of Caedichnus with Bicrescomanducator is rejected. Both new ichnospecies are indicative of an attack from a durophagous predator and are often associated with repair scars, indicating the attack was unsuccessful, allowing the prey to repair its shell to some degree. The morphology of the prey shell and the method of predator attack are likely to influence both the shape of the resulting trace and whether one results in subsequent repair. Describing predation traces will create consistency between researchers and facilitate the comparison of predation types, predators, and shell morphologies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".