Monophyly and phylogenetic relationships of Thereva and therevine genus-groups (Insecta : Diptera : Therevidae) based on EF-1a, 28S rDNA and mitochondrial 16S rDNA sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogenetic analyses using 28S rDNA, elongation factor (EF)-1a, and mt 16S rDNA sequences were performed to test the monophyly of Thereva Latreille. Two of the three Afrotropical Thereva species groups lack the genitalia characters that unambiguously diagnose Thereva in the Holarctic Region, but phylogenetic relationships among Thereva species groups and therevine genera are poorly understood. Using an extensive taxonomic sample (39 of the 62 therevine genera) and Thereva, sensu lato (15 spp.), simultaneous analyses of all three gene partitions recovered Nearctic and Palaearctic Thereva species in a well supported clade that includes the Afrotropical seminitida-group but excludes the Afrotropical analis- and turneri-groups. Stronger phylogenetic signal from the EF-1a partition, measured by the skewness statistic and proportion of total parsimony informative characters, dominated conflicting signal from the 16S partition and weaker, but more congruent, signal from 28S. Reducing the taxonomic sample in analyses of Therevinae reduced homoplasy, increased phylogenetic structure and partitioned Bremer support values and reduced incongruence with 28S for the 16S partition. Although molecular analyses yielded partial recovery of informal therevine genus-groups, morphological diagnoses of higher-level groups are poorly supported with the exception of Cyclotelini. The ‘Holarctic radiation’ refers to a diverse clade of genera closely related to Pandivirilia Irwin & Lyneborg and Acrosathe Irwin & Lyneborg widely distributed throughout the Holarctic Region that is the sister-group to Thereva, sensu stricto. Results from these analyses underscore the importance of male and female genitalia characters in recognising monophyletic groups and regional endemism in therevine diversification.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".