Habits of highly effective worms: brachiopod host preferences of North American Devonian microconchids and cornulitids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sclerobiont host preferences are not always clear or consistent between studies, and some of this difficulty comes from treating sclerobionts as a single group, rather than investigating the patterns and preferences seen in specific taxa. We examined the brachiopod host preferences of two sclerobiont groups, microconchids and cornulitids, from the Iowa Basin (Lime Creek Formation), Michigan Basin (Traverse Group), and Appalachian Basin (Hamilton Group) (Devonian, North America). Microconchids preferred hosts with ‘Medium’ costae or plicae over those with smooth valves; they also were less likely to encrust spiriferide brachiopods, although it is unclear whether this is due to the widely spaced plicate topography of spiriferide valves or another factor of their morphology. Cornulitids were only common in the Appalachian Basin, where they showed a preference for the brachiopod Tropidoleptus.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".