Their Day in the Sun: molecular phylogenetics and origin of photosymbiosis in the ‘other’ group of photosymbiotic marine bivalves (Cardiidae: Fraginae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subfamily Fraginae (Cardiidae) is a morphologically diverse group of small-bodied marine clams inhabiting shallow seas worldwide. Like the exclusively photosymbiotic giant clams (Cardiidae: Tridacninae), some fragines are known to host zooxanthellae photosymbionts. However, surveys to widely determine photosymbiotic status and the lack of a comprehensive phylogeny have hindered attempts to track the evolution of photosymbiosis in the group. Worldwide sampling of all fragine genera and subgenera with phylogenetic reconstructions based on four gene regions [nuclear (28S) and mtDNA (16S, cytochrome oxidase I, cytochrome b)] does not support a monophyletic Fraginae. Sampled taxa form four restructured clades: (1) the ‘Fragum’ group, (2) the ‘Trigoniocardia’ and ‘Ctenocardia’ groups, (3) the ‘Parvicardium’ group and (4) the ‘Papillicardium’ group. Maximum likelihood analyses strongly support a clade of European cardiids uniting species from three subfamilies. Live examination of > 50% of species reveals that less than half of derived genera and subgenera host photosymbionts, supporting a single and relatively late origin of photosymbiosis in the Fraginae. The evolutionary implications for a small and little modified earliest diverging photosymbiotic lineage are discussed.
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".