MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SYSTEMATICS OF THE HILDENBRANDIALES (RHODOPHYTA): GENE SEQUENCE AND MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSES OF GLOBAL COLLECTIONS<sup>1</sup>

2003· article· en· W2111988179 on OpenAlexaff
Alison R. Sherwood, Robert G. Sheath

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Phycology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyParaphylyMonophylySystematicsPhylogenetic treeBotanyGenusTaxonZoologyTaxonomy (biology)GeneCladeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fifty‐seven collections of marine and freshwater Hildenbrandia from North America, South America, Europe, and Africa were compared with 21 type and historically important specimens using multivariate morphometrics. Additionally, phylogenetic analyses of 48 specimens of Hildenbrandia and two specimens of Apophlaea were carried out based on sequences of the rbc L chloroplast gene and the nuclear 18S rRNA gene. Morphometric analyses based on vegetative cell and filament dimensions distinguished two groups of freshwater Hildenbrandia specimens, the first corresponding to those collections from North America and the Philippines and the second to those from Europe and the Canary Islands. The first group had smaller mean cell and filament dimensions (cells 4.0 × 4.4 μm, filaments 46.5 μm) and corresponded to H. angolensis , whereas the second group had larger mean dimensions (cells 5.8 × 6.6 μm, filaments 55.3 μm) and represented H. rivularis. Marine specimens were morphometrically distinguishable into two groups based on tetrasporangial division pattern as well as other thallus characters. However, measurements and character determinations of some type specimens differed greatly from the original descriptions, and thus further work to determine the stability of these characters is required. Phylogenetic reconstruction based on the 18S rRNA gene and rbc L gene sequence data generally demonstrated separation of the marine and freshwater forms of Hildenbrandia , with some marine taxa forming monophyletic groups (e.g. H. lecannellieri and H. occidentalis ) and others forming paraphyletic groups (e.g. H. rubra ). The two specimens of Apophlaea formed a monophyletic group within the paraphyletic genus Hildenbrandia.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PhycologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207