LATITUDINAL VARIATION IN SUBSPECIFIC DIVERSIFICATION OF BIRDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patterns of evolution are believed to vary latitudinally, but our understanding of this variation remains limited. Here we examine how patterns of subspecific diversification vary within species of birds, specifically addressing three questions: (1) Are subspecies more numerous at lower latitudes within species, consistent with greater phenotypic differentiation at lower latitudes? (2) If there are more subspecies at lower latitudes within species, can area of breeding range explain this relationship? and (3) how do latitudinal differences in subspecies within species vary geographically across the globe? Using all species with five or more subspecies from 12 of the most diverse families of birds in the world, we found consistently more subspecies at lower latitudes across all families, both hemispheres, and all continents examined. Despite the positive influence of area on the number of subspecies within species, area did not explain the greater number of subspecies at lower latitudes within species. Global patterns of subspecies support the idea that phenotypic differentiation of populations is greater at lower latitudes within species. If subspecies density provides an index of rates of incipient speciation, then our results support evolutionary hypotheses for the latitudinal diversity gradient that invoke higher tropical speciation rates.
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 | 0.000 | 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".