Intertidal Mangrove Foraminifera From The Central Great Barrier Reef Shelf, Australia: Implications for Sea-Level Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary foraminiferal samples and environmental information were collected from three fringing mangrove environments (Sandfly Creek Transect 1 and 2, and Cocoa Creek) in Cleveland Bay, and an estuarine mangrove environment (Saunders Creek) in Halifax Bay, on the central Great Barrier Reef (GBR) coastline, Australia, to elucidate the relationship of the foraminiferal assemblages with the environment. The data support the vertical zonation concept, which suggests that the distribution of foraminifera in the intertidal zone is usually a direct function of elevation, with the duration and frequency of subaerial exposure as the most important factor. An agglutinated foraminiferal assemblage dominated by Miliammina fusca, Trochammina inflata, Ammotium directum and Haplophragmoides sp. exists at the landward edge of the field sites, in a zone between just above Mean Low Water of Neap Tides to Highest Astronomical Tide level (a vertical range of 1.8 m). In addition, a foraminiferal assemblage dominated by Ammonia aoteana is found at all sites, existing between just below Mean Low Water of Neap Tides and Mean High Water of Neap Tides (a vertical range of 0.8 m). These assemblages may be used to reconstruct sea level from fossil cores from the area.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".