MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DNA barcoding and genetic diversity of phyllostomid bats from the Yucatan Peninsula with comparisons to Central America

2012· article· en· W1720153309 on OpenAlexafffund
A. HERNÁNDEZ‐DÁVILA, J. A. VARGAS, Norberto Martínez‐Méndez, Burton K. Lim, Mark D. Engstrom, Jorge Ortega

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology Resources · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario Museum
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsBiologyYucatan peninsulaDNA barcodingGenetic diversityEvolutionary biologyPeninsulaEcologyZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene is the standard DNA barcoding region used for species identification and discovery. We examined the variation of COI (454 bp) to discriminate 20 species of bats in the family Phyllostomidae that are found in the Yucatan Peninsula of southeastern Mexico and northern Guatemala and compared them genetically to other samples from Central America. The majority of these species had low intraspecific variation (mean = 0.75%), but some taxa had intraspecific variation ranging to 8.8%, suggesting the possibility of cryptic species (i.e. Desmodus rotundus and Artibeus jamaicensis). There was a recurring biogeographic pattern in eight species with a separation of northern and southern Middle American localities. The Yucatan Peninsula was a discrete area identified in four species, whereas Panama was recovered in five species of phyllostomid bats. Our study establishes a foundation for further molecular work incorporating broader taxonomic and geographic coverage to better understand the phylogeography and genetic diversity that have resulted from the ecological constraints in this region and the remarkable differentiation of bats in the Neotropics.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Ecology ResourcesSame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207