The genus<i>Monocoryne</i>(Hydrozoa, Capitata): Peculiarities of morphology, species composition, biology and distribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A revision of the genus Monocoryne was undertaken following analysis of peculiarities noted in earlier descriptions of the nominal species. Type specimens of Monocoryne gigantea from northern Norway and Monocoryne minor from South Africa were examined. In addition, non-type material from the Arctic Ocean, Antarctic Seas and the Kuril Islands was studied, and descriptions of species from Alaska and the Canadian Archipelago were investigated. A new diagnosis of the genus Monocoryne, provided here, was a necessary outcome of these studies. Most importantly, hydroids (in species of the genus) are colonial or solitary which differ from Bonnevie's original diagnosis. The collection of solitary polyps is a result of the tenuous nature of the colonies, which tend to fall to pieces. Species of Monocoryne are found in Arctic, Antarctic and temperate waters of the northern and southern hemispheres, and the genus may thus be regarded as bipolar. Although recognized species of Monocoryne are quite similar morphologically, four of them are recognized here to be valid based on current evidence. This conclusion is also supported by their distribution patterns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".