MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885443846 · doi:10.1111/jzs.12243

Molecular phylogeny of neodalyellid flatworms (Rhabdocoela), including three new species from British Columbia

2018· article· en· W2885443846 on OpenAlexafffundabout
India Stephenson, Niels W. L. Van Steenkiste, Brian S. Leander

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoological Systematics & Evolutionary Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlanarian Biology and Electrostimulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyIntertidal zonePhylogenetic treePhylogeneticsSystematicsZoologyBiodiversityTaxonEcology28S ribosomal RNAMolecular phylogeneticsTaxonomy (biology)Evolutionary biologyGeneRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhabdocoel flatworms are abundant members of marine meiofaunal communities worldwide, contributing to a reservoir of biodiversity that thrives in sediments and on macroalgae. Yet, they are relatively understudied due to bias in meiofaunal collection techniques, time-intensive identification and a lack of taxonomic expertise. Here, sampling of intertidal habitats in British Columbia, Canada, was undertaken to enhance our understanding of rhabdocoel diversity in this region. Six species of neodalyellid rhabdocoel were discovered and characterized with DNA sequence and morphological data: Pogaina paranygulgus, Anoplodium hymanae, Baicalellia pusilla n. comb., B. solaris n. sp., B. daftpunka n. sp. and Tamanawas kalipis n. g., n. sp. The latter three species are new to science. A phylogenetic analysis of neodalyellid rhabdocoels, inferred from 18S and 28S ribosomal RNA gene sequences of 39 taxa, provided further insight into their interrelationships, trait evolution and systematics, including the recognition of a new genus, Tamanawas, and the suppression of Canetellia and Coronopharynx.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Zoological Systematics & Evolutionary ResearchSame topicPlanarian Biology and ElectrostimulationFrench-language works237,207