MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011798253 · doi:10.3732/ajb.0800307

Three extant genera of freshwater thalassiosiroid diatoms from Middle Eocene sediments in northern Canada

2009· article· en· W2011798253 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexander P. Wolfe, Peter A. Siver

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyTaxonLineage (genetic)Extant taxonEcologyCladeHabitatPhylogenetic treeFossil RecordPaleontologyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolutionary history of diatoms is only constrained partially by the fossil record. The timing of several key events, such as initial colonization of freshwater habitats by marine taxa, remains poorly resolved. Numerous specimens of the genera Cyclotella, Discostella, and Puncticulata (Ochrophyta: Thalassiosirales) have been recovered in Middle Eocene lacustrine sediments from the Giraffe Pipe locality in the Northwest Territories, Canada. These diatoms extend the fossil record of the family Stephanodiscaceae to at least 40 million years before present (Ma) and thus provide a new evolutionary milepost for the thalassiosiroid diatoms, an important clade of centric diatoms with global representation in both marine and freshwater environments. The quality of the fossil material enables detailed investigations of areolae, fultoportulae, and rimoportulae, revealing direct morphological affinities with a number of extant taxa. These observations extend the antiquity of several characters of phylogenetic importance within the thalassiosiroid diatoms, including the fultoportula, and imply that the entire lineage is considerably older than prior constraints from the fossil record, as suggested independently by several recent molecular phylogenies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicDiatoms and Algae ResearchFrench-language works237,207