MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047316055 · doi:10.1073/pnas.142091799

Second- and third-hand chloroplasts in dinoflagellates: Phylogeny of oxygen-evolving enhancer 1 (PsbO) protein reveals replacement of a nuclear-encoded plastid gene by that of a haptophyte tertiary endosymbiont

2002· article· en· W2047316055 on OpenAlexaff
Ken‐ichiro Ishida, Beverley R. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaptophyteDinoflagellatePeridininEndosymbiosisPlastidBiologyPhylogenetic treeBotanyPhylogeneticsChloroplastAlgaeEvolutionary biologyGeneGeneticsEcologyPhytoplankton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several dinoflagellate species have plastids that more closely resemble those of an unrelated algal group, the haptophytes, suggesting these plastids have been obtained by tertiary endosymbiosis. Because both groups are photosynthetic, all of the genes for nuclear-encoded plastid proteins might be supplied by the dinoflagellate host or some of them might have been replaced by haptophyte genes. Sequences of the conserved nuclear psbO gene were obtained from the haptophyte Isochrysis galbana, the peridinin-containing dinoflagellate Heterocapsa triquetra, and the 19'hexanoyloxy-fucoxanthin-containing dinoflagellate Karenia brevis. Phylogenetic analysis of the oxygen-evolving-enhancer (PsbO) proteins confirmed that in K. brevis the original peridinin-type plastid was replaced by that of a haptophyte, an alga which had previously acquired a red algal chloroplast by secondary endosymbiosis. It showed clearly that during this tertiary symbiogenesis the original psbO gene in the dinoflagellate nucleus was replaced by a psbO gene from the haptophyte nucleus. The phylogenetic analysis also confirmed that the origin of the peridinin-type dinoflagellate plastid was indeed a red alga.

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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations156
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207