Population genetics of ecological communities with DNA barcodes: An example from New Guinea Lepidoptera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative population genetics of ecological guilds can reveal generalities in patterns of differentiation bearing on hypotheses regarding the origin and maintenance of community diversity. Contradictory estimates of host specificity and beta diversity in tropical Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) from New Guinea and the Americas have sparked debate on the role of host-associated divergence and geographic isolation in explaining latitudinal diversity gradients. We sampled haplotypes of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I from 28 Lepidoptera species and 1,359 individuals across four host plant genera and eight sites in New Guinea to estimate population divergence in relation to host specificity and geography. Analyses of molecular variance and haplotype networks indicate varying patterns of genetic structure among ecologically similar sympatric species. One-quarter lacked evidence of isolation by distance or host-associated differentiation, whereas 21% exhibited both. Fourteen percent of the species exhibited host-associated differentiation without geographic isolation, 18% showed the opposite, and 21% were equivocal, insofar as analyses of molecular variance and haplotype networks yielded incongruent patterns. Variation in dietary breadth among community members suggests that speciation by specialization is an important, but not universal, mechanism for diversification of tropical Lepidoptera. Geographically widespread haplotypes challenge predictions of vicariance biogeography. Dispersal is important, and Lepidoptera communities appear to be highly dynamic according to the various phylogeographic histories of component species. Population genetic comparisons among herbivores of major tropical and temperate regions are needed to test predictions of ecological theory and evaluate global patterns of biodiversity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".