Ultrastructural Description of<i>Breviata anathema</i>, N. Gen., N. Sp., the Organism Previously Studied as “<i>Mastigamoeba invertens</i>”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An understanding of large-scale eukaryotic evolution is beginning to crystallise, as molecular and morphological data demonstrate that eukaryotes fall into six major groups. However, there are several taxa of which the affinities are yet to be resolved, and for which there are only either molecular or morphological data. One of these is the amoeboid flagellate Mastigamoeba invertens. This organism was originally misidentified and studied as a pelobiont using molecular data. We present its first light microscopical and ultrastructural characterisation. We demonstrate that it does not show affinities to the amoebozoan pelobionts, because unlike the pelobionts, it has a double basal body and two flagellar roots, a classical Golgi stack, and a large branching double membrane-bound organelle. Phylogenetic analyses of small subunit ribosomal RNA suggest an affinity with the apusomonads, when a covariotide correction for rate heterogeneity is used. We suggest that previous molecular results have been subject to artefacts from an insufficient correction for rate heterogeneity. We propose a new name for the taxon, Breviata anathema; and the unranked, apomorphy-based name "Breviates" for Breviata and its close relatives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".