Genetic determination of sub-species classification for the Banff longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae smithi).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A morphologically unique population of longnose dace was known to exist in the Case & Basin Marsh in Banff, Alberta. These fish were thought to be geographically separated and designated as a distinct sub-species, the Banff longnose dace. The traditional taxonomic traits used for this classification have been called into question and may not have accurately reflected phylogeny but resulted from genotype, phenotype, or a combination of both. I assessed the validity of the Banff longnose dace sub-species classification using molecular genetic techniques. I also used this approach in combination with otolith microchemistry for extant populations of Cave & Basin Marsh longnose dace to determine migration between the Bow River and the Marsh. Historically, two different evolutionary mtDNA lineages (Great Plains and Pacific) of the longnose dace came into secondary contact in the Cave & Basin Marsh. None of these lineages proved to be unique or restricted to the Marsh. Instead haplotypes from both extant and archived Marsh populations were found in several other extant Western North America longnose dace populations. However, current longnose dace collections in the Marsh revealed only the Great Plains lineage the Pacific lineage was not found and appears to have been swamped out and extirpated from the region by the more numerous longnose dace of Great Plains lineage. This suggests that the missing Pacific lineage and the loss of the Banff longnose dace morphotype may be correlated. Irrespective of the causes for the unique morphology, my mtDNA evidence does not support the morphological evidence of a distinct sub-species. Microsatellite DNA analysis revealed extant longnose dace populations from the Bow River and Cave & Basin Marsh were not significantly different from one another. The otolith microchemistry results complemented the genetic findings and indicated connectivity and movement of fish between the Marsh and the Bow River. The lack of concordance between morphology and genetics, demonstrates the importance
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".