MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SOME PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE OSCILLATORIALES (CYANOBACTERIA) CLADE USING 16S RDNA GENE SEQUENCE DATA

2000· article· en· W2105054740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dale A. Casamatta, Morgan L. Vis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Phycology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMonophylyPhylogenetic treeCladeTaxonPhylogeneticsBotanyEvolutionary biologyZoologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An approximately 1400 base pair region of the 16S rDNA gene was sequenced from taxa within the Oscillatoriales in order to assess phylogenetic relationships. Ten previously unsequenced strains were obtained from the University of Toronto Culture Collection. New sequence data were combined with previously published sequences from a wide representation of cyanobacteria including all currently available, complete Oscillatorialian taxa. Trees constructed using parsimony, distance, and maximum likelihood methods were similar in topology, although a few taxa were variable in their placement depending on the phylogenetic method employed. Newly sequenced taxa of the genera Phormidium, Oscillatoria, and Lyngbya did not form monophyletic clades based on traditional generic designations. Two Lyngbya strains (UTCC296 and 313) and Phormidium subfuscum (UTCC474) formed a well supported monophyletic clade, but the affinity of this clade with other groups was uncertain due to lack of bootstrap support. Oscillatoria sp. (UTCC393) was closely related to the previously sequenced Oscillatoria limnetica and likewise, Phormidium molle (UTCC77) and Phormidium tenue (UTCC473) were placed in a well supported clade with other Oscillatoriales. The other four taxa were variously placed in the trees and their phylogenetic positions could not be determined with certainty.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PhycologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207