Testing use of mitochondrial COI sequences for the identification and phylogenetic analysis of New Zealand caddisflies (Trichoptera)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We tested the hypothesis that cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) sequences would successfully discriminate recognised species of New Zealand caddisflies. We further examined whether phylogenetic analyses, based on the COI locus, could recover currently recognised superfamilies and suborders. COI sequences were obtained from 105 individuals representing 61 species and all 16 families of Trichoptera known from New Zealand. No sequence sharing was observed between members of different species, and congeneric species showed from 2.3 to 19.5% divergence. Sequence divergence among members of a species was typically low (mean = 0.7%; range 0.0–8.5%), but two species showed intraspecific divergences in excess of 2%. Phylogenetic reconstructions based on COI were largely congruent with previous conclusions based on morphology, although the sequence data did not support placement of the purse‐cased caddisflies (Hydroptilidae) within the uncased caddisflies, and, in particular, the Rhyacophiloidea. We conclude that sequence variation in the COI gene locus is an effective tool for the identification of New Zealand caddisfly species, and can provide preliminary phylogenetic inferences. Further research is needed to ascertain the significance of the few instances of high intra‐specific divergence and to determine if any instances of sequence sharing will be detected with larger sample sizes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".