MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Newly discovered ammonites in mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber

2025· article· en· W4411768675 on OpenAlexaff
Lida Xing, Weijia Huang, Docho Dochev, Zhiheng Ma, Ryan C. McKellar

Bibliographic record

VenuePalaeoentomology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsRoyal Saskatchewan MuseumUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurmeseCretaceousPaleontologyGeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amber is famous for preserving detailed records of terrestrial and soft-bodied organisms that have a low preservation potential elsewhere in the fossil record. Because preservation in amber is biased toward animals such as insects that live in close association with resin-producing trees, inclusions of marine fossils in Mesozoic amber are extremely rare. Here, we report unusual fossil assemblages consisting of ammonites preserved alongside terrestrial arthropods in Burmese amber. Under X-ray microcomputed tomography (CT), we made detailed observations of the preserved septa and sutures in the ammonite samples. On the basis of the suture structure, moderately involute shell, and smooth shell surface without ornamentation, we classified one of the new ammonites within the superfamily Desmoceratoidea. The partial filling of shell chambers with calcite suggests that the ammonites were buried for a short time in the sediment, which started the fossilization process prior to encapsulation in resin. Sand infills within the shell chambers indicate significant weathering and transport within a high-energy environment prior to encapsulation. The arthropod inclusions are represented by terrestrial and possibly aquatic associated forms belonging to Acari (mites); Hemiptera: Cimicomorpha: Vetanthocoridae; and Diptera: Muscomorpha. These insects are surrounded by powdered wood, insect frass, and plant fragments. The combined fossil assemblage seems to suggest that at least some amber-producing trees grew close to the coast, capturing a mixture of forest floor communities and partially fossilized shells redeposited from high-energy coastal waters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalaeoentomologySame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207