A cornucopia of cryptic species - a DNA barcode analysis of the gobiid fish genus Trimma (Percomorpha, Gobiiformes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A genetic analysis of partial mitochondrial 5' cytochrome c oxidase I gene (DNA barcode) sequences of 473 specimens assigned to 52 morphological species (including four known, but not formally named, species) of the gobiid genus Trimma revealed the presence of 94 genetic lineages. Each lineage was separated by > 2% sequence divergence. Thus there were an additional 42 haplogroups recognizable as provisional candidate species given that a value of > 2% difference is typical of different species of fishes. Such a high degree of apparently different cryptic species is, in our experience, virtually unprecedented among vertebrates. These results have precipitated further morphological research in a few cases, which has uncovered subtle differences independently corroborating the genetic results. However, such efforts are limited by the dearth of traditional systematists available to undertake the necessary time-consuming, and highly detailed, morphological research. In some cases, the genetic results we present are consistent with, and confirm, minor taxonomic distinctions based on morphology and/or colour pattern. In other instances, what had been recognized as a single species consists of several genetic lineages - up to eight in, for example, what we have identified based on morphology as Trimma okinawae. The increase from 52 to 94 potential species in our sampling raises the predicted total number of species in this genus from about 110 to nearly 200 (versus the 73 valid described species currently recognized).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".