A phylogenetic analysis of relationships among genera of Conopidae (Diptera) based on molecular and morphological data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the family Conopidae (Diptera) have been the focus of little targeted phylogenetic research. The most comprehensive test of phylogenetic support for the present subfamily classification of Conopidae is presented here using 66 specimens, including 59 species of Conopidae and seven outgroup taxa. Relationships among subfamily clades are also explored. A total of 6824 bp of DNA sequence data from five gene regions (12S ribosomal DNA, cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, cytochrome b, 28S ribosomal DNA and alanyl-tRNA synthetase) are combined with 111 morphological characters in a combined analysis using both parsimony and Bayesian methods. Parsimony analysis recovers three shortest trees. Bayesian analysis recovers a nearly identical tree. Five monophyletic subfamilies of Conopidae are recovered. The rarely acknowledged Zodioninae is restored, including the genera Zodion and Parazodion. The genus Sicus is removed from Myopinae. Morphological synapomorphies are discussed for each subfamily and inter-subfamily clade, including a comprehensive review of the character interpretaions of previous authors. Included are detailed comparative illustrations of male and female genitalia of representatives of all five subfamilies with new morphological interpretation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".