Phylogenetic position of the apostome ciliates tested using the small subunit rRNA gene sequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Apostome ciliates are exclusively symbionts, typically of crustaceans. Their life cycles are complex, but show remarkable similarities to ophyroglenines and to other symbiotic oligohymenophoreans, particularly those that undergo microstome–macrostome transformations. The highly modified structures around the cytostome—the rosette and x, y, and z kineties—have made the assessment of homologies to other groups of ciliates difficult. A description of the apostome somatic kinetids with well‐developed overlapping kinetodesmal fibrils suggested affinities with hymenostomes (Bradbury 1966. J. Protozool., 13:591). Further analysis of the ultrastructural features of the oral region of the tomite of Hyalophysa demonstrated homologies to the paroral and adoral ciliature of hymenostomes, confirming these affinities (Bradbury 1989. J. Protozool., 36:95). To test this hypothesis, we proposed to sequence the small subunit rRNA (SSrRNA) genes of apostomes. Specimens of Gymnodinioides sp. were collected from molts of the amphipod Marinogammarus obtusatus collected off the coast of Eastport, ME. Seawater was decanted from the substrate upon which tomonts had settled, and the dish was flooded with 70% ethanol. The ethanol‐fixed ciliates were collected by a micropipette, rinsed with distilled water, and DNA was extracted using the modified Chelex® protocol. The SSrRNA genes were amplified by PCR, and sequences obtained in both directions. Initial BLAST searches of the GenBank databases clearly demonstrated affinities with oligohymenophorean ciliates, particularly scuticociliates. In preliminary phylogenetic analyses which use likelihood, distance and parsimony methods, this relationship was confirmed. However, the apostome sequence diverged basal to the Subclasses Astomatia and Scuticociliatia consistent with the assignment of a Subclass Apostomatia within the Class Oligohymenophorea. We have made collections of Hyalophysa chattoni and anticipate that the SSrRNA gene sequences of this genus will confirm the relationship of apostomes to the oligohymenophoreans. Funded by NSERC Canada Discovery Grant to D. H. L.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".