Phylogenetics and molecular identification of the Ochlerotatus communis and Oc. punctor complexes (Diptera: Culicidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate identification of pathogens and vectors is essential in epidemiological studies of mosquito-borne pathogens. However, the members of the communis and punctor complexes are difficult to distinguish because they are highly cryptic species, with little to no species-specific morphological characters. The objective of this thesis is to develop molecular tools, including RFLP and DNA barcoding using cytochrome oxidase I (COI), internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) and the intron of ribosomal protein S12 (RPS12) to facilitate identification of the members of these two complexes in Manitoba. A distinct interspecific distance for COI was found between the members of the communis complex included here, and diagnostic RFLP profiles were developed for Oc. communis and Oc. churchillensis. Relatively low average interspecific genetic distances using COI, ITS2 and RPS12 were observed between the members of the punctor complex, indicates no discernable boundaries between these species based on DNA barcoding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".