MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005223930

Phylogeography and gut content of Priapulus caudatus in Norway

2024· dissertation· en· W7005223930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetritusBenthic zoneInvertebrateExtant taxonFaunaPredationDetritivorePhylogeographyMollusca
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Priapulus caudatus is a marine worm in the phylum Priapulida, commonly known as penis worms. Since it was discovered, P. caudatus has had many names that are now considered synonyms. Fossils of Priapulida from the Cambrian period are found all over the world, and extant species show that there have been little changes in their morphology since the Palaeozoic. P. caudatus are found in clay/muddy sediment from shallow waters to great depths and records are mostly confined to the northern hemisphere. There is not much knowledge about the role of priapulids in the marine ecosystem, but locally they can be abundant members of benthic communities. Few studies about their diet are available from e.g., the Baltic Sea and Canada, which indicates that extant priapulids feed on a variety of invertebrates like polychaetes, Ophiurida and Amphipoda, but also detritus and meiofauna. Likewise, the priapulid Ottoia prolifica, a very abundant species from the middle Cambrian Burgess Shale biota, is found to have a diet consisting of both live prey such as various invertebrates, and detritus present in its habitat. For determining the diet of P. caudatus in Norwegian waters, X-ray microtomography was used considering its capability of providing more details than when utilizing traditional microscopy methods. It is a non-destructive way of investigating specimens, with the possibility of also investigating the gut contents of fossil priapulids. Detritus and sediment were found to be the main gut content, with some foraminifers, suggesting it being a detritivorous animal that occasionally feed on other invertebrates. Additionally, DNA was extracted from the gut of specimens from the study site in Tromsdalen to be further analyzed with DNA metabarcoding. Metabarcoding did not work, but COI sequences revealed interesting phylogeographic relationships with potentially cryptic species.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 venueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo)Same topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207