Limits to Speciation Inferred from Times to Secondary Sympatry and Ages of Hybridizing Species along a Latitudinal Gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Range expansions are critical to renewed bouts of allopatric or parapatric speciation. Limits on range expansions-and, by implication, speciation-include dispersal ability and permeability of geographical barriers. In addition, recently diverged taxa may interfere with each other, preventing mutual expansion of each other's range into sympatry, because reproductive isolation is incomplete and/or ecological competition particularly strong. On the basis of geographical distributions and mitochondrial DNA phylogenetic information for 418 recently diverged species of New World birds, we estimate that secondary sympatry takes on the order of millions of years following population splitting and hence could impose an important limit on the rate of range expansion, thereby limiting further rounds of species formation. Average rates of achievement of sympatry have been faster in the temperate region (we estimate 1.7 million years to sympatry at 60°) than in the tropics (3.2 million years to sympatry at the equator). Evidence from the ages of species with hybrid zones implies that one factor associated with the slowed sympatry in the tropics is the rate of accumulation of reproductive isolation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".