DNA barcoding of flat bugs (Hemiptera: Aradidae) with phylogenetic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work introduces an open online library of Aradidae DNA barcodes, specimen images and geographical data with intent of promoting further community-based DNA barcoding of flat bugs. We report the results of an attempt to DNA barcode 191 dry specimens of the flat bugs representing all 8 extant subfamilies of the Aradidae. 145 sequences > 300 nt in length were obtained (76% success rate; all can be seen in a publicly accessible dataset “World Aradidae”, doi: dx.doi.org/10.5883/DS-WAHG), 98 of them representing 55 species and 29 genera were > 500 nt (51%). These 98 sequences were combined with 10 Heteroptera-Trichophora outgroup taxa into an aligned matrix of 658 positions and variously analysed to obtain the first DNA-based phylogeny for the Aradidae, which was our second goal. Aradidae and five of its subfamilies (Aradinae, Aneurinae, Mezirinae, Isoderminae, Calisiinae) were recovered as monophyletic, although the latter two were markedly underrepresented. The subfamily Carventinae was consistently polyphyletic. Isoderminae + Prosympiestinae was recovered as a clade, while Aradinae formed the sister group to the rest of the family in three of four analyses. The genus Mezira appeared polyphyletic while the genus Neuroctenus was paraphyletic with respect to Ctenoneurus.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".