DNA barcodes effectively identify the morphologically similar Common Opossum (<i>Didelphis marsupialis</i>) and Virginia Opossum (<i>Didelphis virginiana</i>) from areas of sympatry in Mexico
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two morphologically similar species of opossum from the genus Didelphis-Didelphis virginiana and Didelphis marsupialis-cooccur sympatrically in Mexico. High intraspecific variation complicates their morphological discrimination, under both field and museum conditions. This study aims to evaluate the utility and reliability of using DNA barcodes (short standardized genome fragments used for DNA-based identification) to distinguish these two species. Sequences of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (Cox1) mitochondrial gene were obtained from 12 D. marsupialis and 29 D. virginiana individuals and were compared using the neighbor-joining (NJ) algorithm with Kimura's two-parameter (K2P) model of nucleotide substitution. Average K2P distances were 1.56% within D. virginiana and 1.65% in D. marsupialis. Interspecific distances between D. virginiana and D. marsupialis varied from 7.8 to 9.3% and their barcode sequences formed distinct non-overlapping clusters on NJ trees. All sympatric specimens of both species were effectively discriminated, confirming the utility of Cox1 barcoding as a tool for taxonomic identification of these morphologically similar taxa.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it