Three-dimensional dental microwear in type-Maastrichtian mosasaur teeth (Reptilia, Squamata)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mosasaurs (Squamata, Mosasauridae) were large aquatic reptiles from the Late Cretaceous that filled a range of ecological niches within marine ecosystems. The type-Maastrichtian strata (68-66 Ma) of the Netherlands and Belgium preserve remains of five species that seemed to have performed different ecological roles (carnivores, piscivores, durophages). However, many interpretations of mosasaur diet and niche partitioning are based on qualitative types of evidence that are difficult to test explicitly. Here, we apply three-dimensional dental microwear texture analysis (DMTA) to provide quantitative dietary constraints for type-Maastrichtian mosasaurs, and to assess levels of niche partitioning between taxa. DMTA indicates that these mosasaurs did not exhibit neatly defined diets or strict dietary partitioning. Instead, we identify three broad groups: (i) mosasaurs Carinodens belgicus and Plioplatecarpus marshi plotting in the space of modern reptiles that are predominantly piscivorous and/or consume harder invertebrate prey, (ii) Prognathodon saturator and Prognathodon sectorius overlapping with extant reptiles that consume larger amounts of softer invertebrate prey items, and (iii) Mosasaurus hoffmanni spanning a larger plot area in terms of dietary constraints. The clear divide between the aforementioned first two groups in texture-dietary space indicates that, despite our small sample sizes, this method shows the potential of DMTA to test hypotheses and provide quantitative constraints on mosasaur diets and ecological roles.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".