Reconstructing the feeding ecology of Cambrian sponge reefs: the case for active suspension feeding in Archaeocyatha
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sponge-grade Archaeocyatha were early Cambrian biomineralizing metazoans that constructed reefs globally. Despite decades of research, many facets of archaeocyath palaeobiology remain unclear, making it difficult to reconstruct the palaeoecology of Cambrian reef ecosystems. Of specific interest is how these organisms fed; previous experimental studies have suggested that archaeocyaths functioned as passive suspension feeders relying on ambient currents to transport nutrient-rich water into their central cavities. Here, we test this hypothesis using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of digital models of select archaeocyath species. Our results demonstrate that, given a range of plausible current velocities, there was very little fluid circulation through the skeleton, suggesting obligate passive suspension feeding was unlikely. Comparing our simulation data with exhalent velocities collected from extant sponges, we infer an active suspension feeding lifestyle for archaeocyaths. The combination of active suspension feeding and biomineralization in Archaeocyatha may have facilitated the creation of modern metazoan reef ecosystems.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".