MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012349962 · doi:10.1651/09-3273.1

High Genetic Variability With No Apparent Geographic Structuring in the mtDNA of the Amphidromous River Shrimp Cryphiops caementarius (Decapoda: Palaemonidae) in Northern-Central Chile

2010· article· en· W2012349962 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Dennenmoser, Martín Thiel, Christoph D. Schubart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversität RegensburgDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiological dispersalBiologyShrimpEcologyEstuaryPopulationGene flowPlanktonGenetic variationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freshwater organisms with an amphidromous life cycle are generally thought to disperse widely through marine planktonic larval stages, but only few studies on genetic population structure of amphidromous shrimp exist. We used a 640-basepair region of the mitochondrial gene cytochrome c oxidase I (Cox1) from the amphidromous river shrimp Cryphiops caementarius from five rivers in northern-central Chile to test whether large distances between estuaries (up to 700 km) limit gene flow between populations and result in genetic differentiation among populations. The results revealed high haplotype diversity with no significant geographical structuring, suggesting that gene flow occurs regularly over several hundreds of kilometres, also connecting populations north and south of the Atacama Desert. Seemingly, the terrestrial barrier is overcome by planktonic larval dispersal through the sea, suggesting wide dispersal rather than “stepping-stone” dispersal between estuaries. The population from the southern limit of the geographic distribution of C. caementarius (Río Limari) revealed some weak differentiation in pairwise WST comparisons, but larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm this. Additional studies are needed for a better understanding of factors that promote different life histories, like marine planktonic dispersal, larval retention in estuaries, or an amphidromous-freshwater transition towards a purely freshwater life cycle.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207