MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342729689 · doi:10.1071/sb15043

Taxonomic revision of Halimeda (Bryopsidales, Chlorophyta) in south-western Australia

2016· article· en· W2342729689 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ma. Chiela M. Cremen, John M. Huisman, Vanessa R. Marcelino, Heroen Verbruggen

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Systematic Botany · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Biological Resources StudyGenome Canada
KeywordsHalimedaBiologyEcologyPantropicalSpecies complexGenusTropical Eastern PacificReefBotanyOceanographyPhylogenetic treePacific oceanGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Halimeda J.V.Lamour. is a green algal genus that is an important component of tropical reefs and lagoons. Although it does not generally occur outside the tropics, the range of one putatively widespread species, Halimeda cuneata Hering, in Western Australia extends southward past Cape Leeuwin to its southern extreme at Cape Howe and around to its most easterly record at Middle Island of the Recherche Archipelago. Previous molecular studies have shown that H. cuneata as recorded worldwide encompasses cryptic species diversity, with most of the cryptic entities being geographically isolated from the others. Halimeda cuneata has been the name consistently applied to specimens from the south-western coast of Australia, where it has been regarded as the only representative of its genus in the region. Using a combination of morphological features and assessment of species boundaries based on a plastid gene (tufA) and a nuclear protein-coding gene (HSP90), we have reassessed the supposed presence of H. cuneata in south-western Australia. Our results showed the existence of two species in the region, namely, H. versatilis J.Agardh, to which the name H. cuneata has been misapplied, and H. gigas W.R.Taylor, a central-Pacific species previously recorded only from tropical Australia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations54
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Systematic BotanySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207