Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactions between species are important catalysts of the evolutionary processes that generate the remarkable diversity of life. Symbioses, conspicuous and inherently interesting forms of species interaction, are pervasive throughout the tree of life. However, nearly all studies of the impact of species interactions on diversification have concentrated on competition and predation leaving unclear the importance of symbiotic interaction. Here, I show that, as predicted by evolutionary theories of symbiosis and diversification, multiple origins of a key innovation, symbiosis between gall-inducing insects and fungi, catalysed both expansion in resource use (niche expansion) and diversification. Symbiotic lineages have undergone a more than sevenfold expansion in the range of host-plant taxa they use relative to lineages without such fungal symbionts, as defined by the genetic distance between host plants. Furthermore, symbiotic gall-inducing insects are more than 17 times as diverse as their non-symbiotic relatives. These results demonstrate that the evolution of symbiotic interaction leads to niche expansion, which in turn catalyses diversification.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".