Polymerase Chain Reaction-Restriction Fragment-Length Polymorphism Method to Distinguish <I>Liriomyza huidobrensis</I> from <I>L. langei</I> (Diptera: Agromyzidae) Applied to Three Recent Leafminer Invasions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A molecular method is presented for differentiating the morphologically cryptic leafminers Liriomyza langei Frick and L. huidobrensis (Blanchard). This method requires polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of a 1031-bp region of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase DNA followed by restriction fragment analysis using the restriction enzymes SpeI and EcoRV. Spel cuts the mitochondrial fragment of L. langei into two fragments, but does not cut the L. huidobrensis fragment. EcoRV cuts the L. huidobrensis fragment into two fragments, but does not cut the L. langei fragment. This PCR-restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) method is faster and less costly than DNA sequencing,which is currently the only other way to differentiate these two species. We apply the method to samples from recently introduced leafminer populations in Sri Lanka, Canada, and South Africa and find that the invasive leafminer in all three locations is L. huidobrensis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".