Allopatric origin of cryptic butterfly species that were discovered feeding on distinct host plants in sympatry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surveys of tropical insects are increasingly uncovering cryptic species - morphologically similar yet reproductively isolated taxa once thought to comprise a single interbreeding entity. The vast majority of such species are described from a single location. This leaves us with little information on geographic range and intraspecific variation and limits our ability to infer the forces responsible for generating such diversity. For example, in herbivorous and parasitic insects, multiple specialists are often discovered within what were thought to be single more generalized species. Host shifts are likely to have contributed to speciation in these cases. But when and where did those shifts occur, and were they facilitated by geographic isolation? We attempted to answer these questions for two cryptic species within the butterfly Cymothoe egesta that were recently discovered on different host plants in central Cameroon. We first used mtDNA markers to separate individuals collected on the two hosts within Cameroon and then extended our analysis to incorporate individuals collected across the entire pan-Afrotropical range of the original taxon. To our surprise, we found that the species are almost entirely allopatric, dividing the original range and overlapping only in the narrow zone of West-Central Africa where they were first discovered in sympatry. This finding, combined with analyses of genetic variation within each butterfly species, strongly suggests that speciation occurred in allopatry, probably during the Pleistocene. We discuss the implications of our results for understanding speciation among other cryptic species recently discovered in the tropics and argue that more work is needed on geographic patterns and host usage in such taxa.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".