DNA barcoding of Scandinavian birds reveals divergent lineages in trans-Atlantic species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Birds are a taxonomically well-described group of animals, yet DNA barcoding, i.e., the molecular characterization of species using a standardized genetic marker, has revealed unexpected patterns of genetic divergences among North American birds. We performed a comprehensive COI (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I) barcode survey of 296 species of Scandinavian birds, and compared genetic divergences among 78 trans-Atlantic species whose breeding ranges include both Scandinavia and North America. Ninety-four percent of the Scandinavian species showed unique barcode clusters; the remaining 6% had overlapping barcodes with one or more congeneric species, which may reflect incomplete lineage sorting or a single gene pool. Four species showed large intra-specific divergences within Scandinavia, despite no apparent morphological differentiation or indications of reproductive isolation. These cases may reflect admixture of previously isolated lineages, and may thus warrant more comprehensive phylogeographic analyses. Nineteen (24%) of 78 trans-Atlantic species exhibited divergent genetic clusters which correspond with regional subspecies. Three of these trans-Atlantic divergences were paraphyletic. Our study demonstrates the effectiveness of COI barcodes for identifying Scandinavian birds and highlights taxa for taxonomic review. The standardized DNA barcoding approach amplified the power of our regional studies by enabling independently obtained datasets to be merged with the established avian barcode library.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".