MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765439205 · doi:10.1111/mec.14395

Environmental <scp>DNA</scp> detection of rare and invasive fish species in two Great Lakes tributaries

2017· article· en· W2765439205 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katherine D. Balasingham, Ryan P. Walter, Nicholas E. Mandrak, Daniel D. Heath

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyTributaryEnvironmental DNAFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryEcologyZoologyBiodiversityCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extraction and characterization of DNA from aquatic environmental samples offers an alternative, noninvasive approach for the detection of rare species. Environmental DNA, coupled with PCR and next-generation sequencing ("metabarcoding"), has proven to be very sensitive for the detection of rare aquatic species. Our study used a custom-designed group-specific primer set and next-generation sequencing for the detection of three species at risk (Eastern Sand Darter, Ammocrypta pellucida; Northern Madtom, Noturus stigmosus; and Silver Shiner, Notropis photogenis), one invasive species (Round Goby, Neogobius melanostomus) and an additional 78 native species from two large Great Lakes tributary rivers in southern Ontario, Canada: the Grand River and the Sydenham River. Of 82 fish species detected in both rivers using capture-based and eDNA methods, our eDNA method detected 86.2% and 72.0% of the fish species in the Grand River and the Sydenham River, respectively, which included our four target species. Our analyses also identified significant positive and negative species co-occurrence patterns between our target species and other identified species. Our results demonstrate that eDNA metabarcoding that targets the fish community as well as individual species of interest provides a better understanding of factors affecting the target species spatial distribution in an ecosystem than possible with only target species data. Additionally, eDNA is easily implemented as an initial survey tool, or alongside capture-based methods, for improved mapping of species distribution patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations133
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207