Morphology and DNA barcoding reveal three cryptic species within the Xylophanes neoptolemus and loelia species-groups (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two species complexes within the genus Xylophanes are addressed using a combination of morphological study and analysis of DNA barcode sequences. The existence of two and three cryptic species respectively within the X. loelia and X. neoptolemus complexes is revealed following consideration of both adult habitus and genital morphology, and the results of a phylogenetic analysis of partial COI sequences—DNA barcodes—for 38 specimens. The taxonomic status of the available names is discussed and to clarify and stabilize the confused nomenclature of this group, a neotype for Sphinx neoptolemus Cramer, 1780, and lectotypes for Choerocampa loelia Druce, 1878 and Chaerocampa trilineata Walker, [1865], are designated. We describe three new species: X. lolita n. sp. Vaglia and Haxaire; X. balcazari n. sp. Haxaire and Vaglia; and X. cthulhu n. sp. Haxaire and Vaglia. The first is endemic to southeastern Brazil and closely allied to X. loelia; the second two are relatives of X. neoptolemus, of which the first is known only from Guerrero and Michoacán states in Mexico while the second is widely distributed in lowland forests of Central America.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it