MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076877143 · doi:10.1002/dvg.20450

Additional molecular support for the new chordate phylogeny

2008· article· en· W2076877143 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Delsuc, Georgia Tsagkogeorga, Nicolas Lartillot, Hervé Philippe

Bibliographic record

Venuegenesis · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsChordateBiologySister groupMonophylyPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsLineage (genetic)ZoologyVertebrateCladeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent phylogenomic analyses have suggested tunicates instead of cephalochordates as the closest living relatives of vertebrates. In direct contradiction with the long accepted view of Euchordates, this new phylogenetic hypothesis for chordate evolution has been the object of some skepticism. We assembled an expanded phylogenomic dataset focused on deuterostomes. Maximum-likelihood using standard models and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses using the CAT site-heterogeneous mixture model of amino-acid replacement both provided unequivocal support for the sister-group relationship between tunicates and vertebrates (Olfactores). Chordates were recovered as monophyletic with cephalochordates as the most basal lineage. These results were robust to both gene sampling and missing data. New analyses of ribosomal rRNA also recovered Olfactores when compositional bias was alleviated. Despitethe inclusion of 25 taxa representing all major lineages, the monophyly of deuterostomes remained poorly supported. The implications of these phylogenetic results for interpreting chordate evolution are discussed in light of recent advances from evolutionary developmental biology and genomics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations232
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuegenesisSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207