<scp>DNA</scp> barcodes from century‐old type specimens using next‐generation sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type specimens have high scientific importance because they provide the only certain connection between the application of a Linnean name and a physical specimen. Many other individuals may have been identified as a particular species, but their linkage to the taxon concept is inferential. Because type specimens are often more than a century old and have experienced conditions unfavourable for DNA preservation, success in sequence recovery has been uncertain. This study addresses this challenge by employing next-generation sequencing (NGS) to recover sequences for the barcode region of the cytochrome c oxidase 1 gene from small amounts of template DNA. DNA quality was first screened in more than 1800 century-old type specimens of Lepidoptera by attempting to recover 164-bp and 94-bp reads via Sanger sequencing. This analysis permitted the assignment of each specimen to one of three DNA quality categories--high (164-bp sequence), medium (94-bp sequence) or low (no sequence). Ten specimens from each category were subsequently analysed via a PCR-based NGS protocol requiring very little template DNA. It recovered sequence information from all specimens with average read lengths ranging from 458 bp to 610 bp for the three DNA categories. By sequencing ten specimens in each NGS run, costs were similar to Sanger analysis. Future increases in the number of specimens processed in each run promise substantial reductions in cost, making it possible to anticipate a future where barcode sequences are available from most type specimens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.029 |
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".