MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1886819601 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2015-0014

Phylogeography of the longnose dace (<i>Rhinichthys</i> <i>cataractae</i>) species group in northwestern North America — the Nooksack dace problem

2015· article· en· W1886819601 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Eric B. Taylor, J. D. McPhail, Jennifer A. Ruskey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPhylogeographyZoologyMonophylyCyprinidaeEcologyCladeFisheryPhylogeneticsFish <Actinopterygii>Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae (Valenciennes, 1842); Cyprinidae) is one of the most widespread freshwater fishes in North America, and across its range there have been several divergent forms described that are of uncertain taxonomic status. One of these forms, the Nooksack dace, is found in southwestern British Columbia and adjacent portions of western Washington, and is distinguished from longnose dace by a lower number of lateral-line scales. We sequenced a total of approximately 1400 base pairs (bp) of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and noted that the longnose dace found west of the Continental Divide and Nooksack dace constituted reciprocally monophyletic clades that differed from each other by between 2% and 3% sequence divergence. Sequence analysis at two nuclear loci (the S7 ribosomal protein intron 1 (S7) and recombination activation gene 1 (RAG1)), however, showed no consistent difference between longnose dace and Nooksack dace and several alleles were shared between them. By contrast, consistent differences at both mtDNA and nuclear DNA loci were resolved between R. cataractae samples from east and west of the Continental Divide. The Nooksack dace does not appear to warrant separate taxonomic status from the longnose dace, but the mtDNA differences support its recognition as an important component of the evolutionary and biogeographic legacy of R. cataractae.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→