Phylogenetic analysis reveals that <i>Rhabdopleura</i> is an extant graptolite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A phylogenetic analysis of morphological data from modern pterobranch hemichordates (Cephalodiscus, Rhabdopleura) and representatives of each of the major graptolite orders reveals that Rhabdopleura nests among the benthic, encrusting graptolite taxa as it shares all of the synapomorphies that unite the graptolites. Therefore, rhabdopleurids can be regarded as extant members of the Subclass Graptolithina (Class Pterobranchia). Combined with the results of previous molecular phylogenetic studies of extant deuterostomes, these results also suggest that the Graptolithina is a sister taxon to the Subclass Cephalodiscida. The Graptolithina, as an important component of Early–Middle Palaeozoic biotas, provide data critical to our understanding of early deuterostome phylogeny. This result allows one to infer the zooid morphology, mechanics of colony growth and palaeobiology of fossil graptolites in direct relation to the living members of the clade. The Subdivision Graptoloida (nom. transl.), which are all planktic graptolites, is well supported in this analysis. In addition, we recognize the clade Eugraptolithina (nov.). This clade comprises the Graptoloida and all of the other common and well-known graptolites of the distinctive Palaeozoic fauna. Most of the graptolites traditionally regarded as tuboids and dendroids appear to be paraphyletic groups within the Eugraptolithina; however, Epigraptus is probably not a member of this clade. The Eugraptolithina appear to be derived from an encrusting, Rhabdopleura-like species, but the available information is insufficient to resolve the phylogeny of basal graptolites. The phylogenetic position of Mastigograptus and the status of the Dithecoidea and Mastigograptida also remain unresolved. □ Biodiversity, Cambrian, Hemichordata, Deuterostomia, Ordovician.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".