A Molecular Analysis of Microalgae from Around the Globe to Revise <i>Raphidonema</i> (Trebouxiophyceae, Chlorophyta)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We isolated five microalgal strains from alpine snow near Vancouver, Canada, which display morphological features suggestive of the genera Koliella and Raphidonema. Due to variations in cell size and shape, we could not make a clear delimitation based on morphology. We proceeded to a molecular analysis and included 22 strains from the CCCryo culture collection, previously identified as members of four closely related genera: Raphidonema, Koliella, Stichococcus, and Pseudochlorella. For greater taxonomic context in our phylogenetic analysis, we also obtained authentic strains for the type species of Koliella and Pseudochlorella, but were unable to find one for Raphidonema. To examine generic boundaries, we did a phylogenetic analysis on the rbcL gene for all strains, establishing distinct lineages. Our novel isolates fell within Raphidonema, and so we analyzed the ITS2 gene of all Raphidonema strains to delimit species. To support species delimitations, we did a Compensatory Base Change analysis using the secondary structure of the ITS2 gene to assist in aligning the sequence. We also computed a maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree to examine species clades of Raphidonema. We assigned epitypes for two Raphidonema species based on the best morphological match to strains in the ITS2 clades. We then amended their diagnoses so they can be more reliably identified using DNA sequence data. We also propose two new species, R. catena and R. monicae, that formed their own species clades according to our ITS2 analysis.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".