Redescription of <i><scp>R</scp>hizodomus tagatzi</i> (<scp>C</scp>iliophora: <scp>S</scp>pirotrichea: <scp>T</scp>intinnida), Based on Morphology and Small Subunit Ribosomal <scp>RNA</scp> Gene Sequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herein, we redescribe a tintinnid ciliate that is most commonly known as Tintinnopsis corniger Hada, 1964; but it has been described several times with different names, specifically Tintinnopsis nudicauda Paulmier, 1997 and Rhizodomus tagatzi Strelkow & Wirketis, 1950. Neotype material was collected from the water column of the coastal saline Lake Faro, a meromictic basin connected to the Straits of Messina, Central Mediterranean. The Lake Faro population is characterized by a hyaline or sparsely agglomerated lorica, which made it possible to observe in detail the basal layer structure, usually concealed by abundant incrusting particles. Along with an improved description of the lorica, we provide novel information, such as the general zooid morphology, the ciliary pattern, and the small subunit rRNA (SSU rRNA) gene sequence. Our phylogenetic analysis, based on the SSU rRNA, groups this species with Tintinnopsis radix, while the first taxonomic study designated it as R. tagatzi, introducing a new genus due to peculiarities in lorica morphology. We conclude that the species should be known as R. tagatzi, the senior synonym for the species. However, we do not transfer any other species to this genus, despite strong molecular similarities. Although it is obvious that the genus Tintinnopsis is in need of a thorough revision, current molecular and cytological information for this genus is too sparse, and the type species has not yet been redescribed with modern methods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".