Redescription of <i>Tintinnopsis everta</i> Kofoid and Campbell 1929 (Alveolata, Ciliophora, Tintinnina) Based on Taxonomic and Genetic Analyses—Discovery of a New Complex Ciliary Pattern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The about 1,000 species of tintinnid ciliates are identified and classified almost exclusively based on their lorica features, although the shortcomings of this structure are well-known, e.g. causing uncertain species limitations and nonmonophyletic taxa. Hence, the present redescription of Tintinnopsis everta Kofoid and Campbell, 1929 considers not only the lorica characteristics, but focuses on cell and genetic features. The species is redescribed from the North Atlantic and adjacent sea areas, namely the east coast of the USA, using live observation, protargol-stained material, scanning electron microscopy, and genetic analyses. The main stages of cell division are described, and the species' phylogenetic relationships are inferred from morphological data and the small subunit ribosomal RNA gene sequence. The estimates of its biogeographical distribution and autecology are based on a literature survey. The species is characterised by a complex somatic ciliary pattern with a unique position of the posterior kinety and a conspicuously large distance between the somatic ciliary fields and the collar membranelles. The phylogenetic relationships of Tintinnopsis everta vary in the molecular trees depending on the algorithms used and are, therefore, regarded as unresolved. Nevertheless, the new kind of complex somatic ciliary pattern distinctly contributes to a better understanding of the tintinnid biodiversity and evolution and provides features for a future split of the nonmonophyletic genus Tintinnopsis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".