MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132901701

Taphonomy, Depositional Environments, and Biotic Comparisons of the Silurian Eramosa Lagerstätte, Ontario, Canada

2025· dissertation· W7132901701 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna F. Whitaker

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaphonomySedimentary depositional environmentBiotaSedimentologyBiodiversityMulticellular organismRange (aeronautics)StratigraphyTaxon
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Silurian Period represents the first major terrestrial colonization by multicellular life, and evidence of this transition is preserved in shallow-marine environments. Comprehensive analyses of biodiversity in the fossil record are dependent on the preservation of soft-bodied taxa in Konservat-Lagerstätten, as the fossil record is biased towards preservation of mineralizedremains. The Silurian Eramosa Formation of Ontario, Canada (Wenlock Series, Sheinwoodian Stage; 432.9-430.6 Mya) preserves diverse assemblages in multiple localities that represent a range of depositional environments from marginal marine to fully marine, thus presents a unique opportunity to analyze how preservation mode changes throughout a single carbonate Lagerstätte. In Chapter 1, I describe the sedimentology and stratigraphy of Park Head and Hepworth, two Eramosa Lagerstätte localities described more recently, and compare them to the type locality of the Lagerstätte at Wiarton, Ontario. I interpret a depth gradient of the Lagerstätte intervals, with Park Head in the south being the deepest, Wiarton in the north being the shallowest, and Hepworth as an intermediary. In Chapter 2, I describe the preservational pathways of the three distinct biotas of the Eramosa Lagerstätte, and identify taphonomic patterns related to taxonomy and depositional environment. In Chapter 3, I expand our view and for the first time compare the biota of the Eramosa Lagerstätte to 17 Silurian Lagerstätten worldwide. Using cluster analyses, I identify which Lagerstätten biotas are most similar to one another, and compare how varying statistical methodologies and data treatment affects interpretations. Reconstructing past ecosystems using Konservat-Lagerstätten depends on correctly identifying the taphonomic and environmental lenses inherent to their existence. The Eramosa Lagerstätte demonstrates the necessity and opportunity to study this critical time period in Earth history.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 venueTSpace→Same topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils→French-language works237,207→