Heterotrophic flagellates and centrohelid heliozoans from marine waters of Curacao, the Netherlands Antilles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent progress in understanding the early evolution of eukaryotes was tied to morphological identification of flagellates and heliozoans in the natural samples, isolation of their cultures and genomic and ultrastructural investigations. These protists are the smallest and least studied microbial eukaryotes but play an important role in functioning of microbial food webs. Using light and electron microscopy, we have studied the diversity of heterotrophic flagellates and centrohelid heliozoans from marine waters of Curacao (The Netherlands Antilles), and provide micrographs and morphological descriptions of observed species. Among 86 flagellates and 3 centrohelids encountered in this survey, five heterotrophic flagellates and one Centrohelid heliozoan were not identified even to the genus. Some flagellate protists have a unique morphology, and may represent undescribed lineages of eukaryotes of high taxonomic rank. The vast majority (89%) of identified flagellates are characterized by wide geographical distribution and had been reported previously from all hemispheres and various climatic regions. More than half of the species were previously observed not only from marine, but also from freshwater habitats. The parameters of the species accumulation curve indicate that our species list obtained for the Curacao study sites is far from complete, and each new sample should yield new species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".