DNA-barcoding contradicts morphology in quill mite species Torotrogla merulae and T. rubeculi (Prostigmata: Syringophilidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Torotrogla merulae Skoracki, Dabert et Ehrnsberger, 2000 and T. rubeculi Skoracki, 2004 have been considered as distinct steno- and monoxenous quill mite species (Acari: Prostigmata: Syringophilidae) parasitizing the thrushes of the genus Turdus Linnaeus and the European robin Erithacus rubecula (Linnaeus), respectively. Morphological and molecular studies on the taxonomical status of these two species provided contradictory results. Well defined differences in morphology were not supported by substantial genetic distance in nucleotide sequences of the DNA barcode (mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, COI, and D2 domain of the nuclear 28S rRNA gene), by the topology of the phylogenetic trees (neighbor-joining, maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood) and the network analyses of the COI haplotype genealogy (median-joining, statistical parsimony) that reveal rubeculi populations nested within merulae haplotypes. Since detected differences between T. merulae and T. rubeculi populations (1.6-2.4% for COI and 0.1% for D2) are comparable to the intraspecific level observed in majority of currently recognized European Torotrogla species and are much lower than the interspecific distances observed in the genus, we postulate their conspecificity. Because main morphological distinctions concern the structures used for feeding, we hypothesize that they are the result of phenotypic plasticity evoked by specific and different environmental conditions prevailing on the host bodies (thickness of the feather quill wall).
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".