An analysis of nucleotide and amino acid variability in the barcode region of cytochrome<i>c</i>oxidase I (<i>cox1</i>) in fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 655 bp cytochrome c oxidase subunit I barcode region of single specimens of 388 species of fishes (four Holocephali, 61 Elasmobranchii and 323 Actinopterygii) was examined. All but two ( Urolophus cruciatus and Urolophus sufflavus ) showed different cox1 nucleotide sequences (99.5% species discrimination); the two that could not be resolved are suspected to hybridize. Most of the power of cox1 nucleotide sequence analysis for species identification comes from the degenerate nature of the genetic code and the highly variable nature of the third codon position of amino acids. Variation at the third codon position is bimodally distributed, and the more variable mode is dominated by amino acids with four or six codons, while the less variable mode is dominated by amino acids with two codons. The ratio of nonsynonymous to synomymous changes is much less than one, indicating that this gene is subject to strong purifying selection. Consequently, cox1 amino acid sequence diversity is much less than nucleotide sequence diversity and has very poor species resolution power. Fourteen of the 16 amino acid residues recognized as having important functions in the region of cox1 sequenced were completely conserved over all 388 species (and the bovine cox1 sequence), with one fish species varying at one of these sites, and three fish at another site. No significant differences in amino acid conservation were observed between residues in helices, strands and turns. Patterns of nucleotide and amino acid variability were very similar between elasmobranchs and actinopterygians.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".