<p><strong>Phylogeography of the reed frog <em>Hyperolius</em> <em>castaneus</em> (Anura: Hyperoliidae) from the Albertine Rift of Central Africa: Implications for taxonomy, </strong><strong>biogeography and conservation</strong></p>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine the systematics of multiple populations of the Albertine Rift endemic amphibian Hyperolius castaneus, which currently incorporates four subspecies. Standard morphometric data were analyzed with principal components analyses and analyses of covariance. Phylogenetic analyses of two mitochondrial (16S, cyt b) and one nuclear (RAG1) genes were analyzed from 41 samples representing three subspecies. Results indicated some significant morphometric differences between the nominate subspecies H. c. castaneus and the Itombwe Plateau subspecies H. c. constellatus, and phylogenetic analyses of molecular data recovered these taxa as reciprocally monophyletic groups. We recognize these two allopatric populations as recently diverged, but distinct species, H. castaneus and H. constellatus. The subspecies H. c. submarginatus from the Kabobo Plateau is transferred to the synonymy of H. constellatus, but the status of the unsampled subspecies H. c. rhodogaster, described from mid-elevations of the western Itombwe Plateau, remains problematic. The phylogeographic pattern of our study resembles some, but not all, Albertine Rift vertebrates that have been examined with molecular data. Hyperolius constellatus is restricted to the Itombwe and Kabobo plateaus, which are of special conservation concern because of high levels of amphibian diversity and endemism, and multiple threats from deforestation, mining activities and road construction.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".