MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783911110 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2017-0148

Species delimitation of <i>Melia dubia</i> Cav. from <i>Melia azedarach</i> L. complex based on DNA barcoding

2018· article· en· W2783911110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sivaraj Irusappan, Stalin Nithaniyal, Varadharajan Bhooma, Senthilkumar Umapathy, Madasamy Parani

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhytochemical compounds biological activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Engineering Research BoardDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaDepartment of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsMelia azedarachBiologyDNA barcodingBotanyMeliaceaeMonophylyPhylogeneticsEvolutionary biologyCladeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus Melia L., which belongs to the “Mahogany” family Meliaceae, is a source of important phytochemicals with marked medicinal properties. Species identification in Melia is complex due to the existence of overlapping morphological features. Although Melia dubia Cav. is listed as a synonym of Melia azedarach L., it is not clear from the available literature whether they are the same species or different, and the species complexity still remains unresolved. In the present study, 10 accessions of M. dubia and M. azedarach were analysed by DNA barcoding using three chloroplast DNA markers (rbcL, matK, and trnH–psbA), and one nuclear marker (ITS2). Intraspecific divergence was not found in any of the four markers. However, the interspecific divergence between M. azedarach and M. dubia ranged between 0.3% (rbcL) and 4.7% (ITS2) for individual markers, and for the combined dataset, it was 8.5%. Among the four markers, ITS2 was found to be the most suitable marker for differentiating M. azedarach and M. dubia. Parsimony analysis of the DNA barcoding data showed a clear segregation between M. azedarach and M. dubia as distinct monophyletic clades in all the markers, except the rbcL marker. Our results based on Bayesian analysis of the concatenated dataset strongly support the view that M. dubia be considered a distinct species; not a synonym of M. azedarach.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPhytochemical compounds biological activitiesFrench-language works237,207