MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385621898 · doi:10.1130/g51394.1

Multiple diachronous “Black Seas” mimic global ocean anoxia during the latest Devonian

2023· article· en· W4385621898 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Makram Hedhli, Stephen E. Grasby, Charles M. Henderson, Brandon Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Natural Resources Limited
KeywordsDiachronousAnoxic watersGeologyPaleontologyExtinction eventLate Devonian extinctionDevonianBenthic zonePhanerozoicChemostratigraphyOceanographyCarboniferousStructural basinTotal organic carbonIsotopes of carbonCenozoicEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Devonian-Carboniferous boundary (DCB) Hangenberg extinction in Europe (ca. 359 Ma) and interval of black shale deposition has been considered a global anoxic event, the cause of which remains debated. However, the lack of a prominent global carbon isotope excursion and the duration of anoxia (3–4 m.y. at least) is inconsistent with other global anoxic events (e.g., Mesozoic ocean anoxic events) throughout the Phanerozoic. We examined geochemical and biostratigraphic data along with radiometric dating from purported Hangenberg event sections across the DCB in western Canada and demonstrate that the onset of anoxic pulses in Laurentian seas started before 363 Ma, diachronous with those in Baltica (Europe). Thus, DCB black shales do not record a single global anoxic event. We suggest instead that black shales near the DCB record multiple, but diachronous, Black Sea–like basins around the globe, promoted by the Late Devonian tectonic configuration. This drove a gradual biotic crisis in the form of regional punctuated benthic faunal extinction events.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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