MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941455107 · doi:10.1670/14-010

Genetic Assessment of Taxonomic Uncertainty in Painted Turtles

2015· article· en· W1941455107 on OpenAlexaff
Evelyn L. Jensen, Purnima Govindarajulu, Michael A. Russello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Herpetology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPainted turtleMonophylySubspeciesPhylogenetic treeZoologyDNA barcodingRange (aeronautics)Evolutionary biologyGenusPopulationTaxonEcologyCladeTurtle (robot)GeneticsDemographyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is ongoing uncertainty regarding the taxonomic status of Painted Turtles (genus Chrysemys). Most recently, a phylogenetic analysis of the mitochondrial DNA control region (mtCR) resulted in the elevation of a subspecies to the species level, resulting in two species being tentatively, but not universally, accepted: Chrysemys dorsalis and C. picta, the latter encompassing the three remaining subspecies. Here, we used expanded range-wide sampling and character data from PAX-P1 nuclear intron (n = 127) and mtCR (n = 259) to further investigate taxonomic uncertainty and paleogeography of Painted Turtles. We found five mtCR characters that distinguished C. dorsalis from C. picta; no such evidence was found in PAX-P1. Chrysemys dorsalis formed a monophyletic group in the reconstructed phylogenetic trees, whereas there was no genetic evidence for the distinctiveness of the three C. picta subspecies. The mtCR network showed C. dorsalis and C. p. bellii to each form relatively distinct clusters, whereas no clustering by morphotype was found in the PAX-P1 network. Lower levels of haplotypic diversity across the range of C. p. bellii are consistent with recent postglacial expansion to the west; however, observed mismatch distributions were multimodal, which does not indicate population expansion. Overall, the addition of nuclear DNA character data and expanded sampling support the tentative designation of C. dorsalis and C.picta (encompassing C. p. picta, C. p. bellii, and C. p. marginata) as separate species. Yet, lack of accompanying morphological data and potential for oversplitting due to targeting only individuals within the core of morphotype ranges suggests that further study is warranted.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HerpetologySame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207