MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604209944 · doi:10.1134/s1063074017010060

Molecular phylogeny of the marine Prasiola and Rosenvingiella species (Chlorophyta: Prasiolales) from southeastern Kamchatka

2017· article· en· W2604209944 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatyana A. Klochkova, Н. Г. Клочкова, Gwang Hoon Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Journal of Marine Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treePopulationBotanyGenusChlorophytaMolecular phylogeneticsCladeEcologyZoologyAlgaeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular phylogenetic tools are often useful in distinguishing cryptic species with similar morphologies, but they can also be helpful in identifying morphotypes of a species, which displays completely different shapes. We performed molecular-phylogenetic analysis of supra-tidal green algae in the Kamchatka peninsula that belong to the order Prasiolales (Trebouxiophyceae, Chlorophyta). Based on rbc L sequences results, two new species were recorded for the first time in Kamchatka. Approximately 1.4% of the field-collected Rosenvingiella constricta had a unique uniseriate hood-like blade shape, although their rbc L sequences were 100% identical with typical multiseriate filamentous plants. Kamchatka’s population of R. constricta showed 99.4–99.6% identity in rbc L sequences with the populations from Canada and New Zealand. Another similar-looking Rosenvingiella species collected from the same locality had 93.5% identity of the rbcL gene sequence with R. constricta . Morphological and geographical analyses also suggested that this species might be a new species of the genus Rosenvingiella . Prasiola delicata was recorded for the first time in Kamchatka. The Kamchatka population of P. delicata showed 100% identity in rbc L gene sequence with the population from Vancouver, but differed from the Canadian population morphologically.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Journal of Marine BiologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207