MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164050885 · doi:10.3109/19401736.2011.596833

DNA barcoding of billfishes

2011· article· en· W2164050885 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Hanner, Robin Floyd, Andrea M. Bernard, Bruce B. Collette, Mahmood S. Shivji

Bibliographic record

VenueMitochondrial DNA · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDNA barcodingSwordfishMitochondrial DNAEvolutionary biologyZoologyNuclear geneGeneGeneticsFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Tuna

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA barcoding is a method promising fast and accurate identification of animal species based on the sequencing of the mitochondrial c oxidase subunit (COI) gene. In this study, we explore the prospects for DNA barcoding in one particular fish group, the billfishes (suborder Xiphioidei--swordfish, marlins, spearfishes, and sailfish). We sequenced the mitochondrial COI gene from 296 individuals from the 10 currently recognized species of billfishes, and combined these data with a further 57 sequences from previously published projects. We also sequenced the rhodopsin gene from a subset of 72 individuals to allow comparison of mitochondrial results against a nuclear marker. Five of the 10 species are readily distinguishable by COI barcodes. Of the rest, the striped marlin (Kajikia audax) and white marlin (K. albida) show highly similar sequences and are not unambiguously distinguishable by barcodes alone, likewise are the three spearfishes Tetrapturus angustirostris, T. belone, and T. pfluegeri. We discuss the taxonomic status of these species groups in light of our and other data, molecular and morphological.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations49
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMitochondrial DNASame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207