MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936642902 · doi:10.11646/phytotaxa.402.1.3

Neidiopsis borealis sp. nov., a new diatom species from the mountain Shar Planina, Republic of North Macedonia

2019· article· en· W2936642902 on OpenAlexaff
Danijela Vidaković, Zlatko Levkov, Paul B. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytotaxa · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersScience and Engineering Research BoardAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsBiologySensu strictoSensuTaxonPopulationEcotypeGenusBotanyEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus Neidiopsis is small comprising eight known taxa distributed in oligotrophic to dystrophic freshwater habitats. During observations of diatoms from alpine intermittent ponds on the Shara Mountain, Republic of North Macedonia, a species of Neidiopsis with high abundance was observed. It is characterized by linear to linear–lanceolate valves with a slightly undulated margin, 25.0–43.5 μm long and 6.0–7.0 μm wide. The raphe is filiform with straight proximal and deflected distal raphe endings to the same side of the valve. Striae are partly biseriate near the axial area and continue as uniseriate circular areolae (ca 40 in 10 μm) towards the valve mantle. Striae on each side of the valve are crossed by a prominent longitudinal line located slightly closer to the valve margin. Ultrastructural features of the type population clearly place this taxon into the genus Neidiopsis and aligned to N. levanderi sensu stricto. A similar documented ecotype population (N. levanderi “calcicola”) sensu Lange-Bertalot (2001) is combined with our population and considered a new species N. borealis sp. nov.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytotaxaSame topicDiatoms and Algae ResearchFrench-language works237,207