MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360831350 · doi:10.3897/zookeys.1156.96698

A new hexactinellid-sponge-associated zoantharian (Porifera, Hexasterophora) from the northwestern Pacific Ocean

2023· article· en· W4360831350 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hiroki Kise, Miyuki Nishijima, Akira Iguchi, Junpei Minatoya, Hiroyuki Yokooka, Yuji Ise, Atsushi Suzuki

Bibliographic record

VenueZooKeys · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMarine Sponges and Natural Products
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsAgency for Natural Resources and EnergyMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology
KeywordsSpongeGeologyPacific oceanOceanographyPaleontologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symbiotic associations between zoantharians and sponges can be divided into two groups: those that associate with Demospongiae and those that associate with Hexactinellida. Parachurabana shinseimaruae Kise, gen. nov. et sp. nov. , a new genus and a new species of Hexactinellida-associated zoantharian from Japanese waters, is described. It is characterized by a combination of the following: i) its host hexactinellid sponge, ii) very flat polyps, iii) cteniform endodermal marginal muscles, and iv) characteristic mutations in three mitochondrial regions (including a unique 26-bp deletion in 16S ribosomal DNA) and three nuclear regions. Parachurabana shinseimaruae Kise, gen. nov. et sp. nov. is the third genus in the family Parazoanthidae that is reported to be associated with Hexasterophora sponges. Although specimens have so far only been collected on Takuyo-Daigo Seamount off Minami-Torishima Island in Japan, unidentified zoantharians of similar description have been reported from the waters around Australia, indicating that the species might be widespread across the Pacific.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZooKeysSame topicMarine Sponges and Natural ProductsFrench-language works237,207