MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900462580 · doi:10.1139/gen-2018-0107

Recalibrating the molecular clock for Arctic marine invertebrates based on DNA barcodes

2018· article· en· W2900462580 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Tzitziki Loeza‐Quintana, Christina M. Carr, Tooba Khan, Yash A. Bhatt, Samantha P. Lyon, Paul D. N. Hebert, Sarah J. Adamowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsMolecular clockBiologyMarine invertebratesInvertebrateArcticEcologyRange (aeronautics)Sister groupGenetic divergenceDivergence (linguistics)Cytochrome c oxidase subunit ITaxonPhylogeneticsCladeGenetic diversityGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Divergence times for species assemblages of Arctic marine invertebrates have often been estimated using a standard rate (1.4%/MY) of molecular evolution calibrated using a single sister pair of tropical crustaceans. Because rates of molecular evolution vary among taxa and environments, it is essential to obtain clock calibrations from northern lineages. The recurrent opening and closure of the Bering Strait provide an exceptional opportunity for clock calibration. Here, we apply the iterative calibration approach to investigate patterns of molecular divergence among lineages of northern marine molluscs and arthropods using publicly available sequences of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene and compare these results with previous estimates of trans-Bering divergences for echinoderms and polychaetes. The wide range of Kimura two-parameter (K2P) divergences among 73 trans-Bering sister pairs (0.12%–16.89%) supports multiple pulses of migration through the Strait. Overall, the results indicate a rate of K2P divergence of 3.2%/MY in molluscs, 5%–5.2%/MY in arthropods, and 3.5%–4.7%/MY in polychaetes. While these rates are considerably higher than the often-adopted 1.4%/MY rate, they are similar to calibrations (3%–5%/MY) in several other studies of marine invertebrates. This upward revision in rates means there is a need both to reevaluate the evolutionary history of marine lineages and to reexamine the impact of prior climatic changes upon the diversification of marine life.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207