MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116273580 · doi:10.1645/ge-2370.1

Sphaeridiotrema globulus and Sphaeridiotrema pseudoglobulus (Digenea): Species Differentiation Based On mtDNA (Barcode) and Partial LSU–rDNA Sequences

2011· article· en· W2116273580 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Bergmame, Jane E. Huffman, Rebecca A. Cole, Selvadurai Dayanandan, Vasyl V. Tkach, John McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parasitology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDigeneaWaterfowlDNA barcodingMitochondrial DNABayBarcodeZoologyEcologyGeneticsTrematodaGeneHelminths

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flukes belonging to Sphaeridiotrema are important parasites of waterfowl, and 2 morphologically similar species Sphaeridiotrema globulus and Sphaeridiotrema pseudoglobulus, have been implicated in waterfowl mortality in North America. Cytochrome oxidase I (barcode region) and partial LSU-rDNA sequences from specimens of S. globulus and S. pseudoglobulus, obtained from naturally and experimentally infected hosts from New Jersey and Quebec, respectively, confirmed that these species were distinct. Barcode sequences of the 2 species differed at 92 of 590 nucleotide positions (15.6%) and the translated sequences differed by 13 amino acid residues. Partial LSU-rDNA sequences differed at 29 of 1,208 nucleotide positions (2.4%). Additional barcode sequences from specimens collected from waterfowl in Wisconsin and Minnesota and morphometric data obtained from specimens acquired along the north shore of Lake Superior revealed the presence of S. pseudoglobulus in these areas. Although morphometric data suggested the presence of S. globulus in the Lake Superior sample, it was not found among the specimens sequenced from Wisconsin or Minnesota.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ParasitologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207