Simple Genetic Assay Distinguishes Lamprey Genera <i>Entosphenus</i> and <i>Lampetra</i>: Comparison with Existing Genetic and Morphological Identification Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Several species of lamprey belonging to the genera Entosphenus and Lampetra, including the widely distributed Pacific Lamprey E. tridentatus and Western Brook Lamprey L. richardsoni, co-occur along the West Coast of North America. These genera can be difficult to distinguish morphologically during their first few years of larval life in freshwater, thus hampering research and conservation efforts. However, existing genetic identification methods are time consuming or expensive. Here, we describe a simpler genetic assay using the Pacific Lamprey microsatellite locus Etr-1; the assay was found to be 100% reliable in distinguishing Entosphenus from Lampetra, even in genetically divergent Lampetra populations. Using a sample of 244 larvae (18–136 mm TL) from the Columbia River basin, we tested the accuracy with which previously described differences in caudal fin pigmentation can distinguish these genera. Attempts at morphological identification were abandoned for 50-mm and smaller larvae because differences in caudal fin pigmentation were very difficult to discern. However, morphological identification was correct for 81.8% of 51–70-mm larvae and 100% of 71-mm and larger larvae, which roughly corresponds with the results of previous studies. In agreement with previous work using mitochondrial DNA, our assay also supported placement of the Kern Brook Lamprey L. hubbsi (formerly E. hubbsi) into the genus Lampetra. Received November 23, 2015; accepted March 9, 2016 Published online July 7, 2016
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".