A common garden of <em>Halichondria</em> sponges: taxonomic revision of Northeast Pacific Halichondriidae reveals many cryptic introduced species
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sponges (phylum Porifera) possess biochemical, cellular, and physiological traits with valuable biotechnical applications. However, our ability to harness these natural innovations is limited by a classification system that does not fully reflect their evolutionary history. In this study, we uncover numerous cryptic species within the genus Halichondria that are morphologically indistinguishable from the well-known H. panicea. Many of these species have habitat preferences and geographic distributions that strongly suggest they have been dispersed by human activity. Most of these species are broadly sympatric with their closest relatives, and these overlapping distributions allow us to use patterns of DNA variation to infer reproductive isolation between clades in nature. With reproductively isolated species thus delineated, we can use DNA states as taxonomic characters to formally describe them. Though much remains to be learned about these newly discovered species, the natural "common gardens" of introduced sponges in California, New York, and other locations provide opportunities to test hypotheses about their diversification in future work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 it