MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cyanobacterial diversity and activity in modern conical microbialites

2012· article· en· W2120752554 on OpenAlexaff
Tanja Bosak, Biqing Liang, Ting‐Di Wu, Stefanie P Templer, A. J. Evans, Hojatollah Vali, Jean‐Luc Guerquin‐Kern, Vanja Klepac‐Ceraj, Min Sub Sim, Jeannie Mui

Bibliographic record

VenueGeobiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyanobacteriaMicrobial matBiologyBotanyPaleontologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern conical microbialites are similar to some ancient conical stromatolites, but growth, behavior and diversity of cyanobacteria in modern conical microbialites remain poorly characterized. Here, we analyze the diversity of cyanobacterial 16S rRNA gene sequences in conical microbialites from 14 ponds fed by four thermal sources in Yellowstone National Park and compare cyanobacterial activity in the tips of cones and in the surrounding topographic lows (mats), respectively, by high-resolution mapping of labeled carbon. Cones and adjacent mats contain similar 16S rRNA gene sequences from genetically distinct clusters of filamentous, non-heterocystous cyanobacteria from Subsection III and unicellular cyanobacteria from Subsection I. These sequences vary among different ponds and between two sampling years, suggesting that coniform mats through time and space contain a number of cyanobacteria capable of vertical aggregation, filamentous cyanobacteria incapable of initiating cone formation and unicellular cyanobacteria. Unicellular cyanobacteria are more diverse in topographic lows, where some of these organisms respond to nutrient pulses more rapidly than thin filamentous cyanobacteria. The densest active cyanobacteria are found below the upper 50 μm of the cone tip, whereas cyanobacterial cells in mats are less dense, and are more commonly degraded or encrusted by silica. These spatial differences in cellular activity and density within macroscopic coniform mats imply a strong role for diffusion limitation in the development and the persistence of the conical shape. Similar mechanisms may have controlled the growth, morphology and persistence of small coniform stromatolites in shallow, quiet environments throughout geologic history.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations62
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeobiologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207