High diversity of coralline algae in New Zealand revealed: Knowledge gaps and implications for future research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coralline algae (Corallinophycideae) are calcifying red algae that are foundation species in euphotic marine habitats globally. In recent years, corallines have received increasing attention due to their vulnerability to global climate change, in particular ocean acidification and warming, and because of the range of ecological functions that coralline algae provide, including provisioning habitat, influencing settlement of invertebrate and other algal species, and stabilising reef structures. Many of the ecological roles corallines perform, as well as their responses to stressors, have been demonstrated to be species-specific. In order to understand the roles and responses of coralline algae, it is essential to be able to reliably distinguish individual species, which are frequently morphologically cryptic. The aim of this study was to document the diversity and distribution of coralline algae in the New Zealand region using DNA based phylogenetic methods, and examine this diversity in a broader global context, discussing the implications and direction for future coralline algal research. Using three independent species delimitation methods, a total of 122 species of coralline algae were identified across the New Zealand region with high diversity found both regionally and also when sampling at small local spatial scales. While high diversity identified using molecular methods mirrors recent global discoveries, what distinguishes the results reported here is the large number of taxa (115) that do not resolve with type material from any genus and/or species. The ability to consistently and accurately distinguish species, and the application of authoritative names, are essential to ensure reproducible science in all areas of research into ecologically important yet vulnerable coralline algae taxa.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".