MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126556029 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070461

Molecular Phylogeny and Biogeography of Petaurista Inferred from the Cytochrome b Gene, with Implications for the Taxonomic Status of P. caniceps, P. marica and P. sybilla

2013· article· en· W2126556029 on OpenAlexaff
Song Li, Kai He, Fahong Yu, Qisen Yang

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersKunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsBiologyPhylogeneticsSubspeciesPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyMolecular phylogeneticsTaxonomy (biology)ZoologyTaxonSystematicsCytochrome bEcologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polymorphic genus Petaurista includes a group of diverse species and subspecies that are adapted for gliding and arboreal life. This morphological diversity has resulted in taxonomic discrepancies, and molecular phylogenetic studies have been limited by taxon sampling. To clarify this controversial taxonomy, we used the cytochrome b gene to reconstruct the phylogeny to obtain a more accurate picture of the evolutionary relationships, species differentiation and divergence pattern of Petaurista. The results revealed a significant inconsistency between taxonomic designations, phylogeny and genetic distances. When 6 recognized species were included, species delimitation revealed 15 putative species, a finding that warrants a comprehensive morphological diagnosis and a re-assessment of the species status. The validity of P. caniceps and P. marica was discussed. An estimation of the molecular divergence time demonstrated that the diversification and speciation of Petaurista began during the later Miocene and may have been affected by the uplifting of the Qinghai-Tibet plateau and subsequent climate change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207