Molecular and Phenotypic Evidence of a New Species of Genus Esox (Esocidae, Esociformes, Actinopterygii): The Southern Pike, Esox flaviae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the taxonomic position of the southern European individuals of pike, performing a series of tests and comparisons from morphology, DNA taxonomy and population genetics parameters, in order to support the hypothesis that two species of pike, and not only one, exist in Europe. A strong relationship emerged between a northern genotype supported by COI, Cytb, AFLP and specific fragments, and a phenotype with round spot skin colour pattern and a large number of scales in the lateral line, clearly separated from a southern genotype with other skin colour pattern and a low number of scales in the lateral line. DNA taxonomy, based on a coalescent approach (GMYC) from phylogenetic reconstructions on COI and Cytb together with AFLP admixture analysis, supported the existence of two independently evolving entities. Such differences are not simply due to geographic distances, as northern European samples are more similar to Canadian and Chinese samples than the southern Europe ones. Thus, given that the differences between the two groups of European pike are significant at the phenotypic, genotypic and geographical levels, we propose the identification of two pike species: the already known northern pike (Esox lucius) and the southern pike (E. flaviae n.sp.). The correct identification of these two lineages as independent species should give rise to a ban on the introduction of northern pikes in southern Europe for recreational fishing, due to potential problems of hybridisation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".