Testing taxonomic boundaries and the limit of DNA barcoding in the Siberian sturgeon,<i>Acipenser baerii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA barcoding efforts involving animals have focused on the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (Cox1) gene. Some authors suggest that this marker might under-diagnose young species. Herein, we examine Cox1 and control region diversity in a sample of Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii), a species with an extremely wide geographic distribution in the major rivers of Siberia and in Lake Baikal. Some authors currently recognize three subspecies within this species. These subspecies are reasonable candidates for species units detectable through DNA barcoding. The Cox1 gene illustrated no variation within the species, while the control region displayed statistically significant differences among the subspecies using analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA). Given the uniformity of Cox1 sequences recovered, Cox1 is probably a good region for barcoding A. baerii at the species level. Although control region variation among subspecies was significant, diagnostic differences were not found for any of the subspecies.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".