Who is Oxyrrhis marina? Morphological and phylogenetic studies on an unusual dinoflagellate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxyrrhis marina is an extensively studied morphospecies and a common protist model used to examine a range of ecological processes. Further, as a result of a number of unusual cytological and genetic features, Oxyrrhis is increasingly a target for the study of evolutionary patterns and genome organization within the Alveolata. However, a small number of early morphological studies and recent phylogenetic data suggest that O. marina represents more than one species. As different research groups employ different O. marina isolates (which are potentially highly divergent strains or different species), the context in which comparisons between isolates can be made is difficult to assess. In this paper, we explore the literature that has contributed to the definition of O. marina, highlighting the unusual characteristics possessed by O. marina that have motivated much of the study on this organism and informed its key phylogenetic position. In addition, we assess historical and contemporary evidence for multiple Oxyrrhis species. Based on this assessment, in particular recent molecular genetic data, we assert that O. marina represents two species: O. marina and O. maritima. Based on historical observations, we also indicate that a third species (O. tenticulifera) may occur, although there are no contemporary data to support or refute this designation. Extensive cryptic diversity has important implications for researchers studying Oxyrrhis: caution must be exercised in characterizing Oxyrrhis isolates for experimental study (i.e. it is inappropriate to report assessments concerning poorly characterized isolates), and comparative studies of multiple isolates are required to assess individual, population and species level variation in the genus. Finally, in a broader context, the ecological and evolutionary processes driving diversity in free-living protists remains poorly understood. Model protists such as O. marina and O. maritima for which we are beginning to recognize and characterize an extensive pool of variation present ideal opportunities to unravel these fundamental processes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".