MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098477747 · doi:10.1899/10-011.1

DNA barcoding facilitates description of unknown faunas: a case study on Trichoptera in the headwaters of the Tigris River, Iraq

2011· article· en· W2098477747 on OpenAlexafffund
Christy J. Geraci, Mohammed A. Al-Saffar, Xin Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the North American Benthological Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Genomics InstituteGenome Canada
KeywordsHaplogroupDNA barcodingBiologyFaunaZoologyMonophylyGenusEcologyCladePhylogeneticsHaplotypeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring water quality with aquatic insects as sentinels requires taxonomic knowledge of adult and immature life stages that is not available in many parts of the world. We used deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) barcoding to expedite identification of larval caddisflies from 20 sites in the headwaters of the Tigris River in northern Iraq by comparing their mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences to a global reference library (the Trichoptera Barcode of Life). We obtained full-length DNA barcodes for 16 COI haplogroups from 11 genera in 9 Trichoptera families. The most haplogroups and genera were recorded from Sulaimani Province. Two distinct COI haplogroups were found for the genus Psychomyia, and 5 haplogroups were found for Hydropsyche. The Hydropsyche COI haplogroups do not form a monophyletic clade with reference to the world fauna, but 4 out of 5 haplogroups are related to other Palearctic species. Three larval Rhyacophila specimens in a single COI haplogroup are closely related to specimens of Rhyacophila nubila Zetterstedt and Rhyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) from Europe, but adults from Iraq are needed to confirm their species identity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the North American Benthological SocietySame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207