MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156348218 · doi:10.7717/peerj.11157

A DNA barcode library for the butterflies of North America

2021· article· en· W3156348218 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacopo D’Ercole, Vlad Dincă, Paul A. Opler, Norbert G. Kondla, Christian Schmidt, Jarrett D. Phillips, Robert K. Robbins, John M. Burns, Scott E. Miller, Nick V. Grishin, Evgeny V. Zakharov, Jeremy R deWaard, Sujeevan Ratnasingham, Paul D. N. Hebert

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsOntario GenomicsGenome Canada
KeywordsPolyphylyMonophylyFaunaDNA barcodingBiologyIntraspecific competitionTaxonSpecies complexBarcodeEcologyEvolutionary biologyTaxonomy (biology)ZoologyCladePhylogeneticsPhylogenetic tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the butterflies of North America have received considerable taxonomic attention, overlooked species and instances of hybridization continue to be revealed. The present study assembles a DNA barcode reference library for this fauna to identify groups whose patterns of sequence variation suggest the need for further taxonomic study. Based on 14,626 records from 814 species, DNA barcodes were obtained for 96% of the fauna. The maximum intraspecific distance averaged 1/4 the minimum distance to the nearest neighbor, producing a barcode gap in 76% of the species. Most species (80%) were monophyletic, the others were para- or polyphyletic. Although 15% of currently recognized species shared barcodes, the incidence of such taxa was far higher in regions exposed to Pleistocene glaciations than in those that were ice-free. Nearly 10% of species displayed high intraspecific variation (>2.5%), suggesting the need for further investigation to assess potential cryptic diversity. Aside from aiding the identification of all life stages of North American butterflies, the reference library has provided new perspectives on the incidence of both cryptic and potentially over-split species, setting the stage for future studies that can further explore the evolutionary dynamics of this group.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207