MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003955271 · doi:10.1080/00318884.2019.1709144

Species delimitation of <i>Planosiphon gracilis</i> morphospecies (Scytosiphonaceae, Phaeophyceae) from Japan and the description of <i>Pl. nakamurae sp. nov.</i>

2020· article· en· W3003955271 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Masakazu Hoshino, M. Emilia Croce, Takeaki Hanyuda, Kazuhiro Kogame

Bibliographic record

VenuePhycologia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLineage (genetic)Phylogenetic treeHolotypeEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsThallusZoologyBotanyGeneTaxonomy (biology)Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular phylogenetic analyses based on mitochondrial cox1 and cox3 and chloroplast rbcL gene sequences revealed that the morphospecies of the brown alga Planosiphon gracilis (Scytosiphonaceae, Ectocarpales) from Japan is a complex of three distinct lineages (lineages I–III). Specimens from these lineages had the typical morphology of Pl. gracilis (i.e. flattened, linear, hollow, and gregarious erect thalli); thus, morphological discrimination among them was difficult in many cases. We observed large genetic divergences among the three lineages (c. 10% in cox1 and cox3). Moreover, we observed a reproductive isolating barrier between lineages I and II, despite the wide overlap in their geographic distribution. Our data, therefore, suggest that these three lineages are distinct species. Since lineage I included the holotype specimen of Pl. gracilis, this lineage was attributed to Pl. gracilis. Lineage III was phylogenetically close to Pl. complanatus from Canada with a 4.1% divergence in cox1. For lineage II, a new species name, Pl. nakamurae sp. nov., was proposed. This new species was also found in Argentina.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhycologiaSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207