MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6967816597 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10538489

Rhizogeton L. Agassiz 1862

2010· article· en· W6967816597 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTentacle (botany)Type speciesGenusHydrozoaCoelenterataType (biology)Cnidaria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genus Rhizogeton L. Agassiz, 1862 Rhizogeton L. Agassiz, 1862: 224. Type species. Rhizogeton fusiformis L. Agassiz, 1862, by monotypy. Diagnosis. Oceaniid hydroids with stolonal colonies. Hydranths arising from hydrorhiza, with thin perisarcal collar at base, varied in shape but nearly cylindrical when extended; tentacles filiform, scattered over much of hydranth; hypostome conical. Gonophores fixed sporosacs, borne on hydrorhiza. Remarks. The genus Rhizogeton L. Agassiz, 1862 is distinguished from other oceaniid hydroids in having stolonal colonies with fixed gonophores that arise only from the hydrorhiza, and in lacking nematophores. Rhizodendrium Calder, 1988 has been considered a synonym (Schuchert 2004; Bouillon et al. 2006), and I agree. Rhizodendrium was established after comparing R. sterreri Calder, 1988 from Bermuda with incompletely described and poorly preserved type material of Rhizogeton fusiformis L. Agassiz, 1862, type species of Rhizogeton, from Massachusetts. The diagram and description of the hydranth of R. fusiformis in L. Agassiz (1862: 224–226, Plate 20) must be considered misleading based on subsequent observations of the species. Abundant fertile colonies identified as R. fusiformis from Passamaquoddy Bay, Canada (ROMIZ B3101, ROMIZ B3102) generally overlap Rhizodendrium sterreri in important characters such as hypostome shape, tentacle numbers and arrangement, and gonophore morphology, the reasons originally given for establishing Rhizodendrium as a distinct genus. Five species are currently recognized in the genus Rhizogeton (Schuchert 2009). Possible undescribed species have been noted in both the Indian Ocean (Gravier-Bonnet & Mioche 1996) and in European waters (Schuchert 2008a: 273–274). Hydroids of Rhizogeton are mostly inconspicuous and poorly known, but they now appear to be notably widespread. Representatives have been reported from the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Arctic oceans, and some are known to raft on phoretic substrates such as pelagic Sargassum (Calder 1988, 1995).

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)0.000
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 score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and EcologyFrench-language works237,207