Morphological and Molecular identification of firefly (<i>Abscondita</i> sp.) from Nsukka Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The beetle family Lampyridae (fireflies) are fascinating group of insects known for their characteristic lighting patterns. The light of firefly is produced from their abdomen by a chemical reaction of the organic compound luciferase. There is lack of information on the species composition and biodiversity of fireflies in Africa despite the speculations that Africa is the richest continent in firefly species diversity. To date, there is no taxonomic key for morphological identification of fireflies of Africa. In addition, there is no reference DNA barcodes for African fireflies in GenBank to enhance species identification using DNA barcoding. These knowledge gaps hamper the study and harnessing the economic and ecological benefits of fireflies in the ecosystem in the continent. The objective of this study was to identify a species of firefly collected in Nsukka using both morphological and molecular methods to encourage and kickstart research on fireflies in Africa. The firefly was collected in the study area using direct capture with the aid of insect net. The species was identified using picture vouchers and keys from Canada and South East Asia. The firefly was identified as Abscondita anceyi using morphological method. Molecular method employed amplified and sequenced 658 bp of the barcode region of the COI gene of the firefly samples. DNA barcoding showed the firefly has a similarity of 89.06% with Abscondita chinensis. Molecular phylogeny based on the COI gene clustered the samples with Abscondita chinensis but in a different branch of the tree. The firefly thus belongs to the genus Abscondita but its specific name is yet to be determined. This is the first barcode of fireflies of the subfamily Luciolinae in Africa. We call for a follow up in documenting fireflies of Africa to harness their benefits in the environment.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".