Phylogeny of the rock wallabies, Petrogale (Marsupialia : Macropodidae). Part II: Detection of hybridisation among macropodines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogenetic relationships among rock-wallabies, Petrogale (Marsupialia: Macropodidae), have proven difficult to resolve. Given the documented interspecific hybridisation in the wild and the ease with which hybrids can be bred in captivity, introgression and hybrid speciation are likely explanations for these difficulties. In this paper, an attempt is made at using a phylogenetic approach to identify Petrogale hybrids of known origin. The Hybrid Detection Criterion (HDC) test is applied to DNA–DNA hybridisation data for 15 full species, two natural yard-bred hybrids, and two artificial hybrids from the same pairs of parental species. While the yard-bred hybrids elude detection with this technique, the artificial hybrids, consisting of equimolar mixture of parental extracts, are easily identified. Moreover, splitsgraphs constructed from five pairs of natural and artificial hybrids, including those evaluated with HDC, and their parents show that, in all cases but one, these two kinds of hybrids do not group together. Because the HDC assumes an intermediate phylogenetic position of the hybrid between its postulated parents, it is likely that unequal crossing-over, or another recombination event, affects the results of the test. These conclusions cast some doubt on the possibility of accurately detecting Petrogale hybrids with a phylogenetic approach.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".