MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ellobiopsids of the Genus <i>Thalassomyces</i> are Alveolates

2004· article· en· W2108754639 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey D. Silberman, Allen G. Collins, Lisa‐Ann Gershwin, Patricia J. Johnson, Andrew J. Roger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNASA Astrobiology Institute
KeywordsBiologyGenusZoologyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ellobiopsids are multinucleate protist parasites of aquatic crustaceans that possess a nutrient absorbing 'root' inside the host and reproductive structures that protrude through the carapace. Ellobiopsids have variously been affiliated with fungi, 'colorless algae', and dinoflagellates, although no morphological character has been identified that definitively allies them with any particular eukaryotic lineage. The arrangement of the trailing and circumferential flagella of the rarely observed bi-flagellated 'zoospore' is reminiscent of dinoflagellate flagellation, but a well-organized 'dinokaryotic nucleus' has never been observed. Using small subunit ribosomal RNA gene sequences from two species of Thalassomyces, phylogenetic analyses robustly place these ellobiopsid species among the alveolates (ciliates, apicomplexans, dinoflagellates and relatives) though without a clear affiliation to any established alveolate lineage. Our trees demonstrate that Thalassomyces fall within a dinoflagellate + apicomplexa + Perkinsidae + "marine alveolate group 1" clade, clustering most closely with dinoflagellates. However, the poor statistical support for branches within this region indicates that additional data will be needed to resolve relationships among these taxa.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207