How many species are in the genus <i>Batrachuperus</i>? A phylogeographical analysis of the stream salamanders (family Hynobiidae) from southwestern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogeographical analysis of DNA sequence data has been routinely used to test species boundaries using the monophyly criterion; however, a complementary criterion, reproductive isolation, is often ignored. We used a combination of phylogenetic and population genetic approaches to determine species boundaries among stream salamanders in the genus Batrachuperus. First, cytochrome b sequence data from 174 Batrachuperus individuals, sampled from 78 populations, were used to reconstruct historical relationships within the genus. Second, allozyme data for 14 presumptive nuclear loci, from 463 individuals sampled from 60 populations, were collected and analysed to assess population similarity or disparity, as well as potential reproductive isolation. The DNA sequence data grouped all populations into seven major monophyletic groups, and the allozyme data provided evidence for reproductive isolation among four of the seven groups, thereby supporting the species status of these groups. The allozyme data suggested that two of the other groups share the same gene pool, and therefore belong to a single species. Finally, the allozyme data revealed two reproductively isolated units within the seventh group, which we suggest represents a case of 'budding speciation' based on the DNA gene tree. In total, seven species of the genus Batrachuperus were defined, two of which were previously unknown. The phylogeographical analysis also revealed that vicariance events might have dominated the evolutionary history of this group, but the speciation events might precede the formation of the existing mountain topology. This study demonstrates the importance of including frequency data from multiple nuclear gene loci in determining species boundaries.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".