Phylogenetic analysis of the druid flies (Diptera: Schizophora: Clusiidae) based on morphological and molecular data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, the Clusiidae (Diptera: Schizophora) is analyzed phylogenetically using morphological and molecular data sets, and then redefined on the basis of derived morphological characters. The biology and distribution of the Clusiidae are also reviewed, a key is provided to the World genera, the status of the genus Craspedochaeta Czerny is reevaluated and the type of Heterochroa pictipennis Wulp is discussed. Molecular data sets include genomic DNA sequences from the mitochondrial genes COI (cytochrome oxidase subunit I) and COII (cytochrome oxidase subunit II), the large ribosomal nuclear subunit 28S, and the nuclear protein-coding carbomoylphosphate synthase (CPS) domain of CAD (or “rudimentary”). Genes were analyzed separately, in combination with each other, and in combination with a morphological data set. Although individual molecular data sets often provided conflicting phylogenetic signals, the topologies of the cladograms produced from each data set alone or in combination were largely similar. Most genus-level relationships and several basal divergences were unresolved, but Apiochaeta was very strongly and consistently supported as Sobarocephalinae, not Clusiinae. The Clusiinae and Sobarocephalinae are subsequently redefined using an adjusted morphological tree — retaining Apiochaeta in the Sobarocephalinae — that is only slightly longer (8.4%, or seven steps) than the most parsimonious tree. Our results illustrate the benefits of multiple independent data sets for phylogenetic reconstruction in order to verify and refine existing classifications.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".