MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diversity and Life-Cycle Analysis of Pacific Ocean Zooplankton by Videomicroscopy and Dna Barcoding: Crustacea

2021· preprint· en· W3122838022 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter J. Bryant, Timothy Arehart

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA barcodingBarcodeBiologyCrustaceanTaxonomy (biology)ZooplanktonBayDNA sequencingZoologyPlanktonMolecular taxonomyEcologyEvolutionary biologyDNAPhylogeneticsGeographyGeneArchaeologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the DNA sequencing of a small element in the mitochondrial DNA (DNA barcoding) makes it possible to easily identify individuals of different larval stages of marine crustaceans without the need for laboratory rearing. It can also be used to construct taxonomic trees, although it is not yet clear to what extent this barcode-based taxonomy reflects more traditional morphological or molecular taxonomy. Collections of zooplankton were made using conventional plankton nets in Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean near Newport Beach, California (Lat. 33.628342, Long. -117.927933) between May 2013 and January 2020, and individual crustacean specimens were documented by videomicroscopy. Adult crustaceans were collected from solid substrates in the same areas. Specimens were preserved in ethanol and sent to the Canadian Centre for DNA Barcoding at the University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada for sequencing of the COI DNA barcode. From 1042 specimens, 544 COI sequences were obtained falling into 199 Barcode Identification Numbers (BINs), of which 76 correspond to recognized species. The results show the utility of DNA barcoding for matching life-cycle stages as well as for documenting the diversity of this group of organisms.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.004
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207