MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389087300 · doi:10.3897/bdj.11.e109554

Clarification of the taxonomic status of Acanthochitona discrepans (Brown, 1827) with new data for the North-East Atlantic Acanthochitona (Polyplacophora, Acanthochitonidae)

2023· article· en· W4389087300 on OpenAlexaff
Katarzyna Vončina, Nina T. Mikkelsen, Christine Morrow, Rory Ang, Julia D. Sigwart

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Data Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersUniversity of Exeter
KeywordsGenusZoologyBiologyKey (lock)NomenclaturePolyplacophoraGeographyEcologyTaxonomy (biology)Mollusca

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus Acanthochitona can be easily distinguished from other chitons by having eighteen tufts of bristles on the dorsal side of the densely spiculose girdle. In the North-East Atlantic, five species of this genus have been recognised so far: A. crinita (Pennant, 1777), A. discrepans (Brown, 1827), A. fascicularis (Linnaeus, 1767), A. oblonga Leloup, 1968 and A. pilosa Schmidt-Petersen, Schwabe et Haszprunar, 2015. The nomenclature of A. crinita , A. discrepans and A. fascicularis was confused for a very long time until Kaas (1985) designated type specimens for them and provided a brief key. However, his work lacked detailed descriptions of the three species and some authors doubted that A. discrepans constitutes a separate species. Subsequently, the taxonomic status of A. discrepans has remained unclear. Here, we implemented an integrative approach which combined morphology and molecular evidence to show that Acanthochitona discrepans is, indeed, a valid species and we present re-descriptions for A. crinita , A. discrepans and A. fascicularis .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Data JournalSame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207