Gellius raphidiophorus Brondsted 1933
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gellius raphidiophorus Brøndsted, 1933 (Fig. 3K) Gellius raphidiophorus Brøndsted, 1933: 18, fig. 7. This combination, described by Brøndsted from Davis Strait between Greenland and Canada collected by the Godthaab Exped. Stat. 160, W of Egedesminde, 68.2833°N 58.2333°W, depth 410 m (holotype ZMUC reg.nr. NHMD237734), is a junior primary homonym of Gellius rhaphidiophora Von Lendenfeld (1888: 190) (currently Haliclona (Gellius) rhaphidiophora) described from Port Jackson, Australia, approximate coordinates 33.85°S 151.25°E, wet syntypes BMNH 1887.1.24.33 and AM G9141, fide Hooper & Wiedenmayer 1994: 121). The difference in spelling of the names, raphi - vs rhaphi - must be ignored according to ICZN art. 58.6 (aspiration or not of consonant), and the difference of the suffix - a vs - us amounts to the first being a misspelling that must be corrected (ICZN art. 34.2), so effectively the two are primary homonyms. The Australian species was redescribed by Hallmann (1914: 363, fig.10) demonstrating that the two are obviously different species (shape and spicule sizes). The junior name is permanently invalid (ICZN art. 57.2) and must be replaced, for which I propose Haliclona (Gellius) godthaabae nom.nov., named after the expedition vessel (there is already a combination Haliclona (Rhizoniera) brondstedi).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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".