Preferential Plastid Retention by the Acquired Phototroph <i>Mesodinium chamaeleon</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ciliate genus Mesodinium contains species that rely to varying degrees on photosynthetic machinery stolen from cryptophyte algal prey. Prey specificity appears to scales inversely with this reliance: The predominantly phototrophic M. major/rubrum species complex exhibits high prey specificity, while the heterotrophic lineages M. pulex and pupula are generalists. Here, we test the hypothesis that the recently described mixotroph M. chamaeleon, which is phylogenetically intermediate between M. major/rubrum and M. pulex/pupula, exhibits intermediate prey preferences. Using a series of feeding and starvation experiments, we demonstrate that M. chamaeleon grazes and retains plastids at rates which often exceed those observed in M. rubrum, and retains plastids from at least five genera of cryptophyte algae. Despite this relative generality, M. chamaeleon exhibits distinct prey preferences, with higher plastid retention, mixotrophic growth rates and efficiencies, and starvation tolerance when offered Storeatula major, a cryptophyte that M. rubrum does not appear to ingest. These results suggest that niche partitioning between the two acquired phototrophs may be mediated by prey identity. M. chamaeleon appears to represent an intermediate step in the transition to strict reliance on acquired phototrophy, indicating that prey specificity may evolve alongside degree of phototrophy.
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 | 0.000 | 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".