MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399297313 · doi:10.1111/jeu.13035

Updated classification of the phylum Parabasalia

2024· review· en· W4399297313 on OpenAlexafffund
Vittorio Boscaro, E. James, Rebecca Fiorito, Javier del Campo, Rudolf H. Scheffrahn, Patrick J. Keeling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsPhylumBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phylum Parabasalia includes very diverse single-cell organisms that nevertheless share a distinctive set of morphological traits. Most are harmless or beneficial gut symbionts of animals, but some have turned into parasites in other body compartments, the most notorious example being Trichomonas vaginalis in humans. Parabasalians have garnered attention for their nutritional symbioses with termites, their modified anaerobic mitochondria (hydrogenosomes), their character evolution, and the wholly unique features of some species. The molecular revolution confirmed the monophyly of Parabasalia, but considerably changed our view of their internal relationships, prompting a comprehensive reclassification 14 years ago. This classification has remained authoritative for many subgroups despite a greatly expanded pool of available data, but the large number of species and sequences that have since come out allow for taxonomic refinements in certain lineages, which we undertake here. We aimed to introduce as little disruption as possible but at the same time ensure that most taxa are truly monophyletic, and that the larger clades are subdivided into meaningful units. In doing so, we also highlighted correlations between the phylogeny of parabasalians and that of their hosts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207