MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063201901 · doi:10.1071/zo08021

Biogeography of butterflies in the Australian monsoon tropics

2008· article· en· W2063201901 on OpenAlexaff
Michael F. Braby

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Zoology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndemismBiogeographyEcologyTropicsSubspeciesFaunaSpecies richnessMonsoonRainforestRange (aeronautics)GeographyBiodiversityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biogeography of butterflies within the monsoon tropical biome of northern Australia is reviewed in terms of patterns of species richness, endemism and area relationships. Available data indicate that the region supports a relatively rich fauna, comprising 265 species (~62% of the total Australian fauna), but endemism is low (6%). No genera are endemic to the monsoon tropics, but two (Neohesperilla, Nesolycaena) are characteristic components, embracing a total of seven species in the region, of which five are endemic. Three ecological specialists (Neohesperilla senta, Elodina walkeri, Candalides delospila), each associated with different vegetation types, appear to be characteristic elements of the monsoon tropics. Of 67 range-restricted species in the monsoon tropics, 15 (mostly associated with savanna) are endemic to the region, while 52 (mostly associated with rainforest) are non-endemic, occurring also in south-east Asia and/or mainland New Guinea. A pronounced attenuation in species richness from Cape York Peninsula across the Top End to the Kimberley is evident. Within the monsoon tropics, Cape York Peninsula stands out as an area of exceptional biodiversity, with 95% of the butterflies (251 species; 7 endemic species, 31 endemic subspecies/geographical forms) recorded from the entire region, compared with the Top End (123 species; 3 endemic species, 17 endemic subspecies/geographical forms). In contrast, the Kimberley has a comparatively depauperate fauna (85 species; 1 endemic species, 0 endemic subspecies) without strong Indonesian affinities, and contains only two range-restricted species. A sister-area relationship between Cape York Peninsula and the Top End–Kimberley is evident in one clade, Acrodipsas hirtipes (northern Cape York Peninsula) + A. decima (Top End), with a pairwise divergence of ~1% based on mtDNA, and is suspected in another, Nesolycaena medicea (southern Cape York Peninsula) and N. urumelia (Top End) + N. caesia (Kimberley); a further five species show similar sister-area relationships across the Carpentarian Gap but at the level of subspecies or geographical form. Three general and complementary hypotheses are proposed to explain patterns of geographical differentiation of butterflies in the monsoon tropics: (1) the Carpentarian Gap is a biogeographical filter, functioning as a barrier for some species but as a bridge for others; (2) divergence among taxa between Cape York Peninsula and the Top End–Kimberley has occurred fairly recently (Quaternary), probably through vicariance; and (3) the Bonaparte Gap, with the exception of Nesolycaena, is not a vicariant barrier for butterflies in the Top End and Kimberley.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ZoologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207