ArticlePeerJ2015
A near-infrared spectroscopy routine for unambiguous identification of cryptic ant species.
Article in PeerJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age, sex, and mating status discrimination in the sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis using near infra-red spectroscopy (NIRS).Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
- Rapid and non-destructive identification of Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles arabiensis mosquito species using Raman spectroscopy via machine learning classification models.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Repositories for Taxonomic Data: Where We Are and What is Missing.Systematic biology · 2020Review
- Near-infrared spectroscopy for metabolite quantification and species identification.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- Evolution of morphological crypsis in the Tetramorium caespitum ant species complex (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Species identification-of importance for most biological disciplines-is not always straightforward as cryptic species hamper traditional identification. Fibre-optic near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is a rapid and inexpensive method of use in various applications, including the identification of species. Despite its efficiency, NIRS has never been tested on a group of more than two cryptic species, and a working routine is still missing. Hence, we tested if the four morphologically highly similar, but genetically distinct ant species Tetramorium alpestre, T. caespitum, T. impurum, and T. sp. B, all four co-occurring above 1,300 m above sea level in the Alps, can be identified unambiguously using NIRS. Furthermore, we evaluated which of our implementations of the three analysis approaches, partial least squares regression (PLS), artificial neural networks (ANN), and random forests (RF), is most efficient in species identification with our data set. We opted for a 100% classification certainty, i.e., a residual risk of misidentification of zero within the available data, at the cost of excluding specimens from identification. Additionally, we examined which strategy among our implementations, one-vs-all, i.e., one species compared with the pooled set of the remaining species, or binary-decision strategies, worked best with our data to reduce a multi-class system to a two-class system, as is necessary for PLS. Our NIRS identification routine, based on a 100% identification certainty, was successful with up to 66.7% of unambiguously identified specimens of a species. In detail, PLS scored best over all species (36.7% of specimens), while RF was much less effective (10.0%) and ANN failed completely (0.0%) with our data and our implementations of the analyses. Moreover, we showed that the one-vs-all strategy is the only acceptable option to reduce multi-class systems because of a minimum expenditure of time. We emphasise our classification routine using fibre-optic NIRS in combination with PLS and the one-vs-all strategy as a highly efficient pre-screening identification method for cryptic ant species and possibly beyond.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.