MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310978786 · doi:10.11646/zoosymposia.22.1.60

Phylogenetics of Acari and their cousins reshuffled by ultraconserved elements (UCE’s): can beauty emerge from chaos?

2022· article· en· W4310978786 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Beaulieu, Monica R Young, Marla Schwarzfeld, Wayne Knee, Pavel B. Klimov, Barry M. OConnor, Matthew D. Shaw, Owen D. Seeman, Hans Klompen, Ian M. Smith, Julie Chapados, Jackson Eyres, Robin Richter, Jeremy R. Dettman, Evert E. Lindquist

Bibliographic record

VenueZoosymposia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicStudy of Mite Species
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcariPhylogeneticsPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyBiologyZoologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the chelicerate tree of life has been the subject of much research, with deep phylogenetic divergences and high evolutionary rates complicating both morphological and molecular approaches (Noah et al., 2020; Ontano et al., 2021; Sharma et al., 2021; Ballesteros et al., 2022). Within Acari, similar challenges exist—even the basic question of whether Acari is mono- or diphyletic remains unresolved (Pepato & Klimov, 2015; Lozano-Fernandez et al., 2019; Van Dam et al., 2019; Ontano et al., 2021). Several recent molecular studies have attempted to resolve these issues using large multi-gene datasets (Pepato et al., 2022; Klimov et al., 2018), mitochondrial genomes (Ban et al., 2022), and transcriptomes (Lozano-Fernandez et al., 2019). Ultraconserved elements (Faircloth et al., 2012) have recently shown great promise for constructing phylogenies for both deeply- and shallowly-diverged taxa (Zhang et al., 2019), including for Chelicerata (Starrett et al., 2017) and for Arrenuridae within Acari (Shoop, 2019), but have not yet been used across the Acari.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.168 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoosymposiaSame topicStudy of Mite SpeciesFrench-language works237,207