<i>Lithothamnion</i> (Hapalidiales, Rhodophyta) in the changing Arctic and Subarctic: DNA sequencing of type and recent specimens provides a systematics foundation*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coralline red algae in the non-geniculate genera Clathromorphum, Phymatolithon and Lithothamnion are important benthic ecosystem engineers in the photic zone of the Arctic and Subarctic. In these regions, the systematics and biogeography of Clathromorphum and Phymatolithon have mostly been resolved whereas Lithothamnion has not, until now. Seventy-three specific and infraspecific names were given to Arctic and Subarctic Lithothamnion specimens in the late 19th and early 20th century by Frans R. Kjellman and Mikael H. Foslie. DNA sequences from 36 type specimens, five historical specimens, and an extensive sampling of recent collections resulted in the recognition of four Arctic and Subarctic Lithothamnion species, L. glaciale, L. lemoineae, L. soriferum and L. tophiforme. Three genes were sequenced, two plastid-encoded, rbcL and psbA, and the mitochondrial encoded COI-5P; rbcL and COI-5P segregated L. glaciale from L. tophiforme but psbA did not. Partial rbcL sequences obtained from type collections enabled us to correctly apply the earliest available names and to correctly place the remainder in synonymy. We were unable to sequence another 22 type specimens, but all of these are more recent names than those that are now applied. It is difficult to identify these species solely on morpho-anatomy as they can all occur as encrusting corallines or as maerl (rhodoliths). We demonstrate the importance of sequencing historical type specimens by showing that the recently proposed North-east Atlantic L. erinaceum is a synonym of one of the earliest published Arctic species of Lithothamnion, L. soriferum, itself incorrectly placed in synonymy under L. tophiforme based on morpho-anatomy. Based on sequenced specimens, we update the distributions and ecology of these 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".