Symbiont diversity in the eukaryotic microbiomes of marine crustacean zooplankton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Protists (eukaryotic microorganisms) commonly form symbiotic associations with crustacean zooplankton, but their diversity, prevalence and ecological roles are underestimated due to the limited scope of previous investigations. Using metabarcoding of the V4 region of the 18S rRNA gene, we characterized the eukaryotic microbiomes of the dominant crustacean zooplankton, specifically copepods, euphausiids, amphipods and ostracods, from the Strait of Georgia, Canada. Sequence reads from the alveolates dominated all zooplankton examined, which mostly comprised ciliates and dinoflagellates of known symbiont lineages. These lineages included not only those of parasitoids but also those of uncharacterized species. Apostome ciliate reads were the most abundant in all hosts except for cyclopoid copepods, which were dominated by the parasitic Syndiniales. Most symbiont lineages showed some degree of host preference, particularly Pseudocolliniidae ciliate parasites with ostracods, but were often detected in all hosts indicating broad host specificity. Reads from free-living protists, including diatoms and surprisingly hydrozoans, were inferred to be part of their diet. Hydrozoans may have been ingested from free organic matter, such as detritus or marine snow, suggesting a likely underestimated pathway of carbon cycling. This investigation contributes to resolving the interactions between zooplankton and protists and the potential ecological significance of symbioses on zooplankton productivity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".