Phylogeography of the longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) species group in northwestern North America — the origin and evolution of the Umpqua and Millicoma dace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Umpqua and Millicoma dace are small cyprinid fishes endemic, respectively, to the Umpqua and Coos rivers on the central coast of Oregon. The origins and relationships of these dace are unclear; however, two hypotheses have been postulated that assume these dace had evolved from a longnose dace ( Rhinichthys cataractae (Valenciennes, 1842)) like ancestor, but from different modes of origin. The direct origin hypothesis postulates that each of these dace originated directly, but independently, from a common ancestor. In contrast, the indirect origin hypothesis postulates that the Umpqua dace originated from a R. cataractae like ancestor and that the Millicoma dace evolved from the Umpqua dace. We used mitochondrial (cytochrome b and control region) sequences to test the two hypotheses. Our maximum likelihood analysis supports the indirect origin hypothesis and argues that together the Umpqua and Millicoma dace form a distinctive Oregon coastal clade within the R. cataractae species group. We also attempt to reconcile this result with the observation that the geographic distribution of the morphologically divergent Umpqua dace is sandwiched between the geographic ranges of the morphologically similar Millicoma dace and longnose dace.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".