Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large, morphologically heterogeneous population of acanthomorphic acritarchs from the early Neoproterozoic Wynniatt Formation, Victoria Island, northwestern Canada, is ascribed to two form-genera, Tappania and Germinosphaera, but just a single natural taxon, Tappania. Analysis of Tappania morphology shows it to have been an actively growing, benthic, multicellular organism capable of substantial differentiation. Most notably, its septate, branching, filamentous processes were capable of secondary fusion, a synapomorphy of the "higher fungi." Combined with phylogenetic, taphonomic and functional morphologic evidence, such "hyphal fusion" identifies Tappania reliably, if not conclusively, as a fungus, probably a sister group to the "higher fungi," but more derived than the zygomycetes. \n \nThe presence of Tappania in the Mesoproterozoic Roper Group of Australia extends the record of putative fungi to 1430 Ma. Along with other Proterozoic acritarchs exhibiting fungus-like characteristics (e.g., Trachyhystrichosphaera, Shuiyousphaeridium, Dictyosphaera, Foliomorpha), there is a case to be made for an extended and relatively diverse record of Proterozoic fungi.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".