Patterns of DNA Barcode Variation in Canadian Marine Molluscs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molluscs are the most diverse marine phylum and this high diversity has resulted in considerable taxonomic problems. Because the number of species in Canadian oceans remains uncertain, there is a need to incorporate molecular methods into species identifications. A 648 base pair segment of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene has proven useful for the identification and discovery of species in many animal lineages. While the utility of DNA barcoding in molluscs has been demonstrated in other studies, this is the first effort to construct a DNA barcode registry for marine molluscs across such a large geographic area. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This study examines patterns of DNA barcode variation in 227 species of Canadian marine molluscs. Intraspecific sequence divergences ranged from 0-26.4% and a barcode gap existed for most taxa. Eleven cases of relatively deep (>2%) intraspecific divergence were detected, suggesting the possible presence of overlooked species. Structural variation was detected in COI with indels found in 37 species, mostly bivalves. Some indels were present in divergent lineages, primarily in the region of the first external loop, suggesting certain areas are hotspots for change. Lastly, mean GC content varied substantially among orders (24.5%-46.5%), and showed a significant positive correlation with nearest neighbour distances. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: DNA barcoding is an effective tool for the identification of Canadian marine molluscs and for revealing possible cases of overlooked species. Some species with deep intraspecific divergence showed a biogeographic partition between lineages on the Atlantic, Arctic and Pacific coasts, suggesting the role of Pleistocene glaciations in the subdivision of their populations. Indels were prevalent in the barcode region of the COI gene in bivalves and gastropods. This study highlights the efficacy of DNA barcoding for providing insights into sequence variation across a broad taxonomic group on a large geographic scale.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".