Dinoflagellate, Euglenid, or Cercomonad? The Ultrastructure and Molecular Phylogenetic Position of<i>Protaspis grandis</i>n. sp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protaspis is an enigmatic genus of marine phagotrophic biflagellates that have been tentatively classified with several different groups of eukaryotes, including dinoflagellates, euglenids, and cercomonads. This uncertainty led us to investigate the phylogenetic position of Protaspis grandis n. sp. with ultrastructural and small subunit (SSU) rDNA sequence data. Our results demonstrated that the cells were dorsoventrally flattened, shaped like elongated ovals with parallel lateral sides, 32.5-55.0 mum long and 20.0-35.0 mum wide. Moreover, two heterodynamic flagella emerged through funnels that were positioned subapically, each within a depression and separated by a distinctive protrusion. A complex multilayered wall surrounded the cell. Like dinoflagellates and euglenids, the nucleus contained permanently condensed chromosomes and a large nucleolus throughout the cell cycle. Pseudopodia containing numerous mitochondria with tubular cristae emerged from a ventral furrow through a longitudinal slit that was positioned posterior to the protrusion and flagellar apparatus. Batteries of extrusomes were present within the cytoplasm and had ejection sites through pores in the cell wall. The SSU rDNA phylogeny demonstrated a very close relationship between the benthic P. grandis n. sp. and the planktonic Cryothecomonas longipes. These ultrastructural and molecular phylogenetic data for Protaspis indicated that the current taxonomy of Protaspis and Crythecomonas is in need of re-evaluation. The composition and identity of Protaspis is reviewed and suggestions for future taxonomic changes are presented. Problems within the genus Cryothecomonas are highlighted as well, and the missing data needed to resolve ambiguities between the two genera are clarified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".