CRYPTOMONAD EVOLUTION: NUCLEAR 18S rDNA PHYLOGENY VERSUS CELL MORPHOLOGY AND PIGMENTATION<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A nuclear18S rDNA phylogeny for cryptomonad algae is presented, including 11 species yet to be investigated by molecular means. The phylogenetic positions of the cryptomonad genera Campylomonas and Plagioselmis are assessed for the first time. Campylomonas groups most closely with morphologically similar species with the same accessory pigment from the genus Cryptomonas. Plagioselmis groups with the genera Teleaulax and Geminigera forming a clade whose members are united by unusual thylakoid arrangement. Nuclear 18S rDNA phylogeny divides cryptomonads into seven major lineages, two of which consist of the monospecific genera Proteomonas and Falcomonas. Analysis of nuclear18S rDNA sequence supports suggestions that a Falcomonas ‐like cryptomonad gave rise to all other blue‐green cryptomonads. New sequence from the plastid‐lacking cryptomonad genus Goniomonas is also included, and the order of divergence of the major cryptomonad lineages is discussed. The morphology, number, and pigmentation of the cryptomonad plastidial complex are congruent with nuclear 18S rDNA phylogenies. Host cell features, such as periplast type, furrow/gullet system, and cell shape, can be more variable and may be markedly different in species that are closely related by nuclear 18S rDNA phylogeny. Conversely, some species that are not closely related by molecular phylogeny may display a very similar, possibly primitive, periplast and furrow morphology.
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) | 0.002 | 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".