Molecular and morphological data from Thoosidae in favour of the creation of a new suborder of Tetractinellida
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Thoosidae (Porifera, Demospongiae, Tetractinellida) currently includes the genera Thoosa, Alectona, and Delectona. To this date, molecular data are only available for Alectona. In this study, the phylogenetic affinities of the genera Thoosa and Alectona have been investigated with the species T. mismalolli, T. calpulli, and T. purpurea from the Mexican Pacific using morphology and three molecular loci: the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (CO1 mtDNA), 28S rRNA (fragment D2), and 18S rRNA. Morphology and embryology showed that these genera are quite different from the rest of the tetractinellids because larvae of Alectona and Thoosa have unique features in sponges, such as the presence of monaxonic discs in Thoosa and tetraxonic discs in Alectona which disappear in the adult stages. A phylogenetic analysis using selected species from the order Tetractinellida revealed that Thoosa groups with Alectona thus confirming morphological studies. The peculiarities in spiculation and embryology of the Thoosa and Alectona larvae, which are markedly different from species belonging to the suborders Astrophorina and Spirophorina and their distant phylogenetic position (based on three molecular loci), suggest that Thoosidae could be placed in the new suborder Thoosina.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".