MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792062153

Biodiversity of the Muscidae (Diptera) from Churchill, Manitoba, Canada, with taxonomic issues revealed or resolved by DNA barcoding

2012· article· en· W2792062153 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Anais Krystel Renaud

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChurchill Northern Studies CentreGovernment of CanadaGenome CanadaOntario GenomicsOntario Genomics InstituteFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesBishop's University
KeywordsMuscidaeDNA barcodingBiodiversityEcologyGeographyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 2007 survey of muscid flies from Churchill, Manitoba, Canada, yielded 155 species. The diversity of this contemporary assemblage was compared to that of an historical (pre-1965) assemblage. Few differences were found between assemblages for material collected by net sweeping and most non-overlapping species between time periods were rare in samples and/or collected by different methods. DNA barcoding was used as a tool to assist with the identification of Muscidae specimens. Performance of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene (COI) in the discrimination of muscid species was assessed and correspondence levels of 98.6% were established between species limits recovered by DNA barcode clusters and morphology. I conclude that the great majority of species limits currently accepted in the literature are adequate for Muscidae and that DNA barcoding is a useful identification tool for this family.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesFrench-language works237,207