GENETIC RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SOME SPECIES GROUPS WITHIN THE GENUS LUTZOMYIA (DIPTERA: PSYCHODIDAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular data on Lutzomyia are very scarce, despite the fact that this genus includes all the species involved in the transmission of leishmaniasis in America. We examine the genetic relationships among eight morphologic groups within the Lutzomyia genus and two Brumptomyia species, using nine enzyme loci and the last 285 basepairs of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene. The structure of the genetic variation among the species analyzed indicated a closer genetic relationship among members of a morphologic group than between members of different groups. The lower levels of variation recorded among these groups compared with that between Brumptomyia and Lutzomyia suggest a subgeneric status for all of these groups, including Psychodopygus. A maximum likelihood tree for the allozyme data and a neighbor-joining consensus tree for the mitochondrial DNA sequences showed a general agreement with morphologic groups, with only minor differences. Nyssomyia, Verrucarum and Micropygomyia formed separate monophyletic groups. Lutzomyia could not be separated from Psathyromyia, and both Migonei species, L. dubitans and L. migonei, grouped in different clades according to the host species they are found on.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".