MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081590160 · doi:10.1656/058.010.0202

First Distributional Study of Branchiobdellida (Annelida: Clitellata) in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, North Carolina and Tennessee, USA, with a Redescription of<i>Cambarincola holostomus</i>Hoffman, 1963

2011· article· en· W2081590160 on OpenAlexaff
Stuart R. Gelder, Bronwyn W. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSoutheastern Naturalist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClitellataCrayfishNational parkFaunaEcologyTaxonGeographyBiologyBiodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Branchiobdellidans, or crayfish worms, are species-rich in the Appalachian area of the southeastern United States. Even so, the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP) in the southern Appalachians has only one record of a branchiobdellidan species. As part of the All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory, we undertook a general survey of the branchiobdellidans in the GSMNP. Crayfish were collected from a total of 15 sites distributed across 11 watersheds in the GSMNP We identified a total of 10 species of branchiobdellidans: 1 species of Bdellodrilus, 1 species of Oedipodrilus, 2 species of Pterodrilus, 1 species of Xironodrilus, and 5 species of Cambarincola. The composition and number of species per site ranged from 0 to 6, and individual branchiobdellidan species occurrence ranged from 1 to 11 sites. Our results suggest that multiple factors affect distribution and occurrence on certain hosts. Study of specimens of Cambarincola holostomus Hoffman, 1963 enabled us to add new morphological characters to the description of this species. An intensive survey of watersheds and crayfish fauna in the GSMNP is necessary to understand the multiple factors affecting species distributions and host preferences and to facilitate conservation of both the symbionts and their hosts.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoutheastern NaturalistSame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207