Analysis of ITS1 and ITS2 sequences in <i>Ensis</i> razor shells: suitability as molecular markers at the population and species levels, and evolution of these ribosomal DNA spacers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internal transcribed spacer 1 and 2 (ITS1 and ITS2) sequences were analysed in Ensis razor shells (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Pharidae). We aimed to (1) test ITS1 and ITS2 as molecular markers at the population level in the successful alien E. directus (Conrad, 1843); (2) test these spacers at the species level in E. directus and three other Ensis species, E. siliqua (L., 1758), E. macha (Molina, 1782), and E. magnus (Schumacher, 1817); and (3) analyse the evolutionary processes that may be shaping Ensis ITS1 and ITS2 extant variation. In E. directus, despite the intragenomic divergence detected, ITS1 and ITS2 were informative in differentiating the geographic areas considered (Denmark and Canada) by means of both the insertion-deletion polymorphism and the nucleotide polymorphism. In this species, the 5.8S ribosomal gene (5.8S) showed scarce polymorphism. At the species level, maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood analyses revealed that ITS1 and ITS2 may be suitable to reconstruct Ensis phylogenetic relationships. Finally, the evolutionary models that best fit the long-term evolution of Ensis ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 are discussed. A mixed process of concerted evolution, birth-and-death evolution, and selection is chosen as an option that may reconcile the long-term evolution of Ensis ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 and 5S ribosomal DNA.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".