MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phylogeny of the water strider genus Rheumatobates (Heteroptera: Gerridae)

2000· article· en· W2082883245 on OpenAlexaff
Locke Rowe, Douglas C. Currie

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Entomology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHemiptera Insect Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
FundersTexas A and M University
KeywordsBiologyCladogramGerridaeCladisticsCladeMonophylyZoologyPhylogeneticsGenusHeteropteraSubfamilyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The genus Rheumatobates comprises thirty‐seven species and subspecies of New World water striders belonging to subfamily Rhagadotarsinae. Among species, males vary dramatically in the degree and nature of modifications of the antennae, three pairs of legs and abdominal and genital segments. Characters describing this modification have traditionally been used to differentiate and group species. The general assumption has been that modified species belong to one group and unmodified species to another. These two ‘species groups’ are subdivided into ‘subgroups’, but little effort has been made to resolve relationships among them. We conduct the first numerical cladistic analysis of Rheumatobates using a data set comprised of 102 characters, primarily describing modification of male external morphology. To address concerns about the inclusion of characters to be optimized on the phylogeny, characters describing modification of antennae and hind legs were included and then excluded in separate analyses. A preferred phylogeny was chosen from the four equally parsimonious cladograms found after successive reweighting of characters. There was good resolution at all levels of the phylogeny. Most of the major clades and terminal relationships were moderately to strongly supported, whereas the basal relationships were less well supported. The general assumption that unmodified and modified species form two monophyletic groups was not supported. However, traditionally recognized ‘subgroups’ within the modified species group were largely upheld. The analysis also suggested several major clades and relationships among these clades that were not previously recognized. The exclusion of characters describing modification of antennae and hind legs did not change the resolved major clades of the reconstructed phylogeny.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic EntomologySame topicHemiptera Insect StudiesFrench-language works237,207