Ultrastructure and molecular phylogenetic position of a new marine sand-dwelling dinoflagellate from British Columbia, Canada: <i>Pseudadenoides polypyrenoides</i> sp. nov. (Dinophyceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two monospecific genera of marine benthic dinoflagellates, Adenoides and Pseudadenoides, have unusual thecal tabulation patterns (lack of cingular plates in the former; and no precingular plates and a complete posterior intercalary plate series in the latter) and are thus difficult to place within a phylogenetic framework. Although both genera share morphological similarities, they have not formed sister taxa in previous molecular phylogenetic analyses. We discovered and characterized a new species of Pseudadenoides, P. polypyrenoides sp. nov., at both the ultrastructural and molecular phylogenetic levels. Molecular phylogenetic analyses of SSU and LSU rDNA sequences demonstrated a close relationship between P. polypyrenoides sp. nov. and Pseudadenoides kofoidii, and Adenoides and Pseudadenoides formed sister taxa in phylogenetic trees inferred from LSU rDNA sequences. Comparisons of morphological traits, such as the apical pore complex (APC), demonstrated similarities between Adenoides, Pseudadenoides and several planktonic genera (e.g. Heterocapsa, Azadinium and Amphidoma). Molecular phylogenetic analyses of SSU and LSU rDNA sequences also demonstrated an undescribed species within Adenoides.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".