Molecular and morphological variation within swim bladder nematodes, <i>Cystidicola</i> spp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We sequenced four rDNA regions (ITS-1, ITS-2, 5.8S, and D3 region of 28S) from the parasitic nematode Cystidicola spp. from seven species of fish host and 11 locations in Canada and Finland to elucidate suspected unresolved genetic variation within the genus. A holarctic species, Cystidicola farionis from the swim bladder of Salmonidae and Osmeridae, and a nearctic species, Cystidicola stigmatura from trout and char (Salvelinus spp.), differ in life history, host and geographic range, reproductive strategy, and adult and egg morphology. These nematodes were identical at three rDNA regions (ITS-1, 5.8S, and D3); however, two ITS-2 variants were found that differed at four nucleotide positions: variant I (366 bp) was found in British Columbia populations of C. farionis and in C. stigmatura and variant II (369 bp) was found in Ontario and Finnish populations of C. farionis. These results demonstrate that two species with distinct morphology and biology can have identical rDNA sequences, while two morphologically identical isolates have different ITS-2 sequences. Thus, rDNA spacer regions may not be useful for distinguishing biologically valid species or subspecies in some nematode groups. Although phenotypic variation suggested a third undescribed species of Cystidicola from lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis), rDNA analysis did not provide meaningful evidence of its uniqueness.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".