The evolution of morphological diversity in continental assemblages of passerine birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding geographic variation in the species richness and lineage composition of regional biotas is a long-standing goal in ecology. Why do some evolutionary lineages proliferate while others do not, and how do new colonists fit into an established fauna? Here, we analyze the morphological structure of assemblages of passerine birds in four biogeographic regions to examine the relative influence of colonization history and niche-based processes on continental communities of passerine birds. Using morphological traits related to habitat choice, foraging technique, and movement, we quantify the morphological spaces occupied by different groups of passerine birds. We further quantify morphological overlap between groups by multivariate discriminant analysis and null model analyses of trait dispersion. Finally, we use subclade disparity through time to assess the temporal component of morphological evolution. We find mixed support for the prediction, based on priority, that first colonizers constrain subsequent colonizers. Indeed, our results show that the assembly of continental communities is idiosyncratic with regards to the diversification of new clades and the filling of morphospace.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".