Identification of Nearctic black flies using DNA barcodes (Diptera: Simuliidae)
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
DNA barcoding has gained increased recognition as a molecular tool for species identification in various groups of organisms. In this preliminary study, we tested the efficacy of a 615-bp fragment of the cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) as a DNA barcode in the medically important family Simuliidae, or black flies. A total of 65 (25%) morphologically distinct species and sibling species in species complexes of the 255 recognized Nearctic black fly species were used to create a preliminary barcode profile for the family. Genetic divergence among congeners averaged 14.93% (range 2.83-15.33%), whereas intraspecific genetic divergence between morphologically distinct species averaged 0.72% (range 0-3.84%). DNA barcodes correctly identified nearly 100% of the morphologically distinct species (87% of the total sampled taxa), whereas in species complexes (13% of the sampled taxa) maximum values of divergence were comparatively higher (max. 4.58-6.5%), indicating cryptic diversity. The existence of sibling species in Prosimulium travisi and P. neomacropyga was also demonstrated, thus confirming previous cytological evidence about the existence of such cryptic diversity in these two taxa. We conclude that DNA barcoding is an effective method for species identification and discovery of cryptic diversity in black flies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it