<i>Patiriella pseudoexigua</i> (Asteroidea: Asterinidae): a cryptic species complex revealed by molecular and embryological analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cryptic lineages were identified within a morphologically uniform group of sea stars distributed from Australia to Japan. Among eight populations, all of which have been referred to Patiriella pseudoexigua , we found seven unique mitochondrial DNA sequences clustered into four distinct lineages. These four lineages formed a monophyletic group in which sister clades were separated by small genetic distances but could be differentiated from each other on the basis of reproductive differences. The four lineages thus appear to be separate but very closely related species. Examination of reproduction in several Queensland populations revealed that one population (Statue Bay) consisted of hermaphroditic intragonadal brooders with live-born offspring while other populations (Townsville, Bowen, Airlie Beach) consisted of dioecious free-spawners with a planktonic larva. The brooded larvae from central Queensland populations closely resembled brooded embryos and larvae of a Japanese lineage, while the planktonic larvae from northern Queensland were similar to the original description of planktonic larvae from a Taiwan population. However, each of the viviparous lineages was more closely related to a lineage with planktonic larval development than the viviparous lineages were to each other. Patiriella pseudoexigua thus comprises at least four species with different reproductive phenotypes in which viviparous brooding appears to have evolved in parallel. Based on previous taxonomic work we propose the following names for these four lineages: the dioecious free-spawner from northern Queensland (including the P. pseudoexigua type locality) is P. pseudoexigua sensu stricto ; the viviparous brooder from central Queensland is undescribed and here referred to as Patiriella sp. nov; the dioecious free-spawner from Taiwan is temporarily referred to as Patiriella sp. (a senior name for this species may be P. pentagonus ); and the hermaphrodite brooder from Japan should be raised to specific status and referred to by the new combination P. pacifica .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".