Do Red and Green Make Brown?: Perspectives on Plastid Acquisitions within Chromalveolates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chromalveolate "supergroup" is of key interest in contemporary phycology, as it contains the overwhelming majority of extant algal species, including several phyla of key importance to oceanic net primary productivity such as diatoms, kelps, and dinoflagellates. There is also intense current interest in the exploitation of these algae for industrial purposes, such as biodiesel production. However, the evolution of the constituent species, and in particular the origin and radiation of the chloroplast genomes, remains poorly understood. In this review, we discuss current theories of the origins of the extant red alga-derived chloroplast lineages in the chromalveolates and the potential ramifications of the recent discovery of large numbers of green algal genes in chromalveolate genomes. We consider that the best explanation for this is that chromalveolates historically possessed a cryptic green algal endosymbiont that was subsequently replaced by a red algal chloroplast. We consider how changing selective pressures acting on ancient chromalveolate lineages may have selectively favored the serial endosymbioses of green and red algae and whether a complex endosymbiotic history facilitated the rise of chromalveolates to their current position of ecological prominence.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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 it