MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6911471578 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10994133

Philobrya brattstromi Soot-Ryen 1957

2024· article· en· W6911471578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeBeagleCoastal zoneEscarpment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Philobrya brattstromi Soot-Ryen, 1957 (Figure 8) Philobrya brattstrØmi Soot-Ryen, 1957: 2. Philobrya brattströmi. Soot-Ryen 1959: 22, 23, pl. 1, fig. 6. Philobrya brattstromi. Ramorino 1968: 198, pl. 1, figs. 5, 6 and pl. 5, figs. 2, 4; Malchus 2006: 8‒14, figs. 1‒23; Cárdenas et al. 2008: 227, fig. 6.70; Malchus & Sartori 2013: figs. 25.3‒5; Valentich-Scott et al. 2020: 142, pl. 47. ? Philobrya olstadi. Linse 2002: 120, fig. 9.1.2-16. (Not Soot-Ryen, 1951: 12, 13, pl. 1, figs. 9, 10). Type locality: South of Isla Guar, W of Bajo Pucarí, Seno Reloncaví, 41°44.42’S 72°55.75’W, 70 m. Material examined: Photographs of the holotype (NRM 3894). Beagle Channel: Isla Conejo, 54°50.88’S 68°14.67’W, 16 m (MACN-In 44430: 6 v); Isla Gable, 54°55’S 67°21’W, 15‒20 m (MLP-Ma 16113: 1 v); Isla Becasses, 54°57’S 67°01’W, 30‒40 m (MLP-Ma 16114: 2 spec, 1 v); Cabo San Pío: 55°03’S 66°37’W, 30‒35 m (MLP-Ma 16115: 1 spec, 2 v), 55°06’S 66°29’W, 65‒80 m (MLP-Ma 16116: 2 v). Atlantic coast of Patagonia: Tierra del Fuego Province: 53°10.74’S 67°13.19’W, 78 m (MACN-In 44431: 1 spec); 54°08.76’S 64°57.60’W, 110 m (MACN-In 44432: 1 v). Isla de los Estados: Puerto Vancouver, 54°52.44’S 64°03.37’W, 271 m (MACNIn 44433: 1 v). Burdwood Bank: 54°31.68’S 61°27.98’W, 137 m (MACN-In 44434: 1 spec, 1 v); 54°28.49’S 60°56.46’W, 102 m (MACN-In 44435: 20 v); 54°29.74’S 60°12.59’W, 95 m (MACN-In 44436: 1 v); 54°35.39’S 58°37.85’W, 140 m (MACN-In 44437: 1 v); 54°11.54’S 58°19.88’W, 90 m (MACN-In 44438: 1 spec, 9 v). Distribution: Pacific coast of Patagonia, from Valparaíso (Ramorino 1968; Valentich-Scott et al. 2020) to Cape Horn (Linse 2002), extending into the Atlantic coast of Patagonia to Isla de los Estados and Burdwood Bank (this study); 15‒271 m (living specimens: 25‒137 m). Description: Shell small (maximum L = 5.8 mm), modioliform, relatively high (H/L = 0.76 ± 0.03, n = 10), compressed (W/H = 0.54 ± 0.03, n = 10), delicate; with a narrow, flat to slightly depressed dorsal slope. Umbos broad, only slightly outstanding from shell outline; located at anterior end, somewhat dorsally displaced. Umbonal angle: 100‒120° (n = 8). Dorsal margin with the anterior portion long, straight, obliquely directed backwards and the posterior portion broadly curved, forming a continuous curve with the posterior margin. Ventral margin nearly straight. Prodissoconch D-shaped, with posterior end higher than anterior end, widely projected ventrally, of 590‒660 µm Lp (n = 8), set off by a prominent rim. Antero-dorsal and postero-dorsal areas raised, with prominent commarginal folds near the umbo, nearly smooth distally. Central area smooth in appearance. Dissoconch whitish, dull; sculpture cancellate, consisting of 9‒13 fine radial ribs, and numerous, moderately separated, commarginal cords. Commarginal sculpture weaker than radial sculpture. Periostracum thick, yellow, extending up to 1 mm beyond calcified shell margin; forming narrow radial folds, raised commarginal lamellae and long, thin setae. Commarginal lamellae extending up to the tip of the setae, with straight margin between setae. Inner shell surface with 3‒5 prominent folds radiating from the umbo to the posterior portion of dorsal margin, where produce strong crenulations. Posterior and ventral margins smooth. Posterior adductor muscle scar located in the posterior third of the valves, dorsally displaced. Hinge: Anterior and posterior series of G1b teeth forming an angle of 167‒170° (n = 4). All teeth in both series well-recognizable in specimens of up to 2.6 mm L. Distal teeth of the posterior series partially disintegrated, forming pustules, in specimens longer than 3.3 mm. Distal teeth of the anterior series also forming pustules in specimens longer than 4.9 mm. Resilifer long and narrow. Remarks: In general shell shape, Philobrya brattstromi resembles P. atlantica (Fig. 4), P. wandelensis (Fig. 18), P. sanjuani (Fig. 16) and small-sized specimens of P. blakeana (Fig. 6), from which it differs by having a centrally smooth prodissoconch (P. atlantica shows radial ribs, P. blakeana radial and commarginal elements, and P. wandelensis and P. sanjuani microscopic pits). The periostracal setae of P. brattstromi are narrower than those of P. atlantica, longer than those of P. wandelensis and P. sanjuani, and sparser than those of P. blakeana (Appendix 1). In addition, the commarginal periostracal lamellae of P. brattstromi show straight margins, while those of P. atlantica, P. wandelensis, P. sanjuani and P. blakeana show a deep sinuation between setae. Philobrya brattstromi also differs from P. wandelensis and P. sanjuani by having a narrower dorsal slope of the shell, longer resilifer, and internal crenulations restricted to the posterior portion of dorsal margin (instead of having all inner margins crenulated). Linse (2002) identified as P. olstadi a “prodissoconch” (actually a “larva”) collected in the Drake Passage, off Cape Horn. The photograph she provided (Linse 2002: fig. 9.1.2-16) is about 650 µm Lp, agreeing both in size and sculpture with the characteristics here recognized for P. brattstromi. Ríos et al. (2003) mentioned P. brattstromi from the Strait of Magellan, although this record could not be verified. Huber (2010) regarded P. brattstromi as a junior synonym of P. aequivalvis, a criterion not shared herein.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicMarine and coastal plant biology→French-language works237,207→