MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Small‐Subunit rRNA Phylogenies Suggest That<i>Epalxella antiquorum</i>(Penard, 1922) Corliss, 1960 (Ciliophora, Odontostomatida) Is a Member of the Plagyopylea

2007· article· en· W2040789999 on OpenAlexaff
Thorsten Stoeck, Wilhelm Foissner, Denis H. Lynn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAustrian Science FundDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiologyIncertae sedisMonophylyCladeLineage (genetic)GenusZoologyEvolutionary biologyRibosomal RNAPhylogeneticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The odontostomatid ciliates have remained a homogeneous order of ciliates since the 1930s when they were recognized as a monophyletic assemblage. Since that time they have been placed with the heterotrich ciliates, and more recently transferred as incertae sedis to the new "riboclass" class Armophorea. We were able to obtain the small subunit rRNA gene sequence of the odontostomatid Epalxella antiquorum (Penard, 1922) Corliss, 1960, collected from the meromictic alpine Lake Alat in Germany, in July 2005. An alignment with representatives of all 11 classes of ciliates unambiguously places the Epalxella sequence with other representatives of the class Plagiopylea with 100% support in both maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses. Epalxella is the basal lineage with trimyemid and plagiopylid ciliates forming the two terminal sister clades. While this molecular support is strong and unambiguous, there are no obvious morphological features to unite these three clades. Thus, the class Plagiopylea must continue to be referred to as a "riboclass." Using the Epalxella sequence as a basal marker, we tentatively identified 20 environmental sequences to the terminal plagiopylean clades: eight to the genus Trimyema; four to the genus Plagiopyla; and eight to two new species, one of which might represent a new plagiopylean genus.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations30
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207