Source and Distribution of Palynomorphs in Southern Red Sea Coastal Environments of Saudi Arabia; Their Palaeoenvironmental and Palaeoecological Inferences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Palynomorph assemblages and mineral microfossils from five southern Red Sea coastal environments were studied to demonstrate their distribution pattern and suggest their source. The environments studied were 1. mangrove swamp 2. middle Holocene paleochannel 3. algal mat, 4. Sabia Island coral reef, and intertidal zone. The samples studied were from the top 3 cm semi-consolidated sediments from various environments. Standard palynological maceration technique was used to isolate palynomorphs. These sediment samples are mainly clay and fine sand and yielded low numbers but high diversity of palynomorph assemblages. They are grouped into pollen and spores, dinoflagellate cysts, and algal remains, fungal spores, hyphae and fruit bodies, protists, and invertebrates. A few Ascidian and sponge spicules, and phytoliths (mineral microfossils) occur in the Sabia Island coral reef environment. The protists and invertebrate remain include microforaminifera, thecamoebians, tintinnomorphs, crustacean and annelid palynomorphs. The assemblage also includes six form taxa belonging to the form genera Katora and Mangrovia. These palynomorphs belong to both marine and terrestrial environments and are of autochthonous and allochthonous origins. The source and genetic relationship of each palynomorphs is discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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".