MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137069844 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0805039105

Competition between cryptic species explains variations in rates of lineage evolution

2008· article· en· W2137069844 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Alizon, Michal Kučera, Vincent A. A. Jansen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLineage (genetic)BiologyEvolutionary biologyCompetition (biology)Species complexParallel evolutionPlanktonEcologyMolecular evolutionPhylogeneticsGenePhylogenetic treeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gradual evolution is a common phenomenon in the fossil record of marine microplankton, yet no theoretical model has so far been presented to explain the observed pattern of unidirectionality in trait evolution lasting over tens of millions of generations. Recent molecular genetic data show that the majority of microfossil-producing plankton groups harbors substantial cryptic diversity. Here, we examine the effect of cryptic diversity on apparent rates of lineage evolution. By using a theoretical approach, we show that under resource competition, an increasing number of sibling species within a hypothetical lineage leads to an exponential slowdown of the apparent rate of evolution. This mechanism explains both the remarkable variation in apparent rates of evolution observed in marine plankton, as well as the presence of long gradual evolutionary trends.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations45
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207