MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073313170 · doi:10.1111/jeu.12037

Biodiversity and Molecular Phylogeny of Australian <i>Clevelandella</i> Species (Class Armophorea, Order Clevelandellida, Family Clevelandellidae), Intestinal Endosymbiotic Ciliates in the Wood‐Feeding Roach <i>Panesthia cribrata</i> Saussure, 1864

2013· article· en· W2073313170 on OpenAlexaff
Denis H. Lynn, André‐Denis G. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Eye InstituteCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsBiologyCladeBiodiversityZoologyGenetic diversitySpecies complexPhylogeneticsTaxonomy (biology)EcologyPhylogenetic treeGeneGeneticsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are over 100 species in the Order Clevelandellida distributed in many hosts. The majority is assigned to one of the five families, the Nyctotheridae. Our knowledge of clevelandellid genetic diversity is limited to species of Nyctotherus and Nyctotheroides. To increase our understanding of clevelandellid genetic diversity, species were isolated from intestines of the Australian wood-feeding roach Panesthia cribrata Saussure, 1864 from August to October, 2008. Four morphospecies, similar to those reported in Java and Japan by Kidder [Parasitologica, 29:163-205], were identified: Clevelandella constricta, Clevelandella nipponensis, Clevelandella parapanesthiae, and Clevelandella panesthiae. Small subunit rRNA gene sequences assigned all species to a "family" clade that was sister to the clade of species assigned to the Family Nyctotheridae in the Order Clevelandellida. Genetics and morphology were consistent for the first three Clevelandella species, but isolates assigned to C. panesthiae were assignable to three different genotypes, suggesting that this may be a cryptic species complex.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations45
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207