Taxonomic revision of the Agaraceae with a description of <i>Neoagarum</i> gen. nov. and reinstatement of <i>Thalassiophyllum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We confirmed the monophyly of the Agaraceae based on phylogenetic analyses of six mitochondrial and six chloroplast gene sequences from Agarum, Costaria, Dictyoneurum, and Thalassiophyllum species, as well as representative species from other laminarialean families. However, the genus Agarum was paraphyletic, comprising two independent clades, A. clathratum/A. turneri and A. fimbriatum/A. oharaense. The latter clade was genetically most closely related to Dictyoneurum spp., and morphologically, the species shared a flattened stipe bearing fimbriae (potential secondary haptera) in the mid- to upper portion. The phylogenetic position of Thalassiophyllum differed between the two datasets: in the chloroplast gene phylogeny, Thalassiophyllum was included in the A. clathratum/A. turneri clade, but in the mitochondrial gene phylogeny, it formed an independent clade at the base of the Agaraceae, the same position it took in the phylogeny when the data from both genomes were combined despite a larger number of bp being contributed by the chloroplast gene sequences. Considering the remarkable morphological differences between Thalassiophyllum and other Agaraceae, and the molecular support, we conclude that Thalassiophyllum should be reinstated as an independent genus. Dictyoneurum reticulatum was morphologically distinguishable from D. californicum due to its midrib, but because of their close genetic relationship, further investigations are needed to clarify species-level taxonomy. In summary, we propose the establishment of a new genus Neoagarum to accommodate A. fimbriatum and A. oharanese and the reinstatement of the genus Thalassiophyllum.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".