Single-locus species delimitation: a test of the mixed Yule–coalescent model, with an empirical application to Philippine round-leaf bats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prospects for a comprehensive inventory of global biodiversity would be greatly improved by automating methods of species delimitation. The general mixed Yule-coalescent (GMYC) was recently proposed as a potential means of increasing the rate of biodiversity exploration. We tested this method with simulated data and applied it to a group of poorly known bats (Hipposideros) from the Philippines. We then used echolocation call characteristics to evaluate the plausibility of species boundaries suggested by GMYC. In our simulations, GMYC performed relatively well (errors in estimated species diversity less than 25%) when the product of the haploid effective population size (N(e)) and speciation rate (SR; per lineage per million years) was less than or equal to 10(5), while interspecific variation in N(e) was twofold or less. However, at higher but also biologically relevant values of N(e) × SR and when N(e) varied tenfold among species, performance was very poor. GMYC analyses of mitochondrial DNA sequences from Philippine Hipposideros suggest actual diversity may be approximately twice the current estimate, and available echolocation call data are mostly consistent with GMYC delimitations. In conclusion, we consider the GMYC model useful under some conditions, but additional information on N(e), SR and/or corroboration from independent character data are needed to allow meaningful interpretation of results.
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 | 0.020 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".