SPECIES DELIMITATION AND THE ORIGIN OF POPULATIONS IN ISLAND REPRESENTATIVES OF PHYLICA (RHAMNACEAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relationships between the closely related island species of Phylica (Rhamnaceae) and a mainland species, P. paniculata, were elucidated using amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs). Parsimony, neighbor joining, and principal coordinate (PCO) analyses indicated that each of the species studied is distinct. AFLPs were also useful in elucidating the genetic relationships and possible infraspecific origins of different island populations in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Phylica nitida on Réunion is likely to have been derived from P. nitida on Mauritius. Although the sampling on New Amsterdam is not extensive, the data are also consistent with the hypothesis that P. arborea on New Amsterdam was derived from a single colonization of P. arborea from Gough Island. Similarly, the Gough Island population appears to have been derived from a single colonization event, but it is so distinct from those on Tristan da Cunha, that there may have been two separate dispersals to Gough and Tristan/Nightingale from different lines of the mainland progenitor. There is also evidence of a recolonization from Gough to Tristan da Cunha. Thus, Phylica arborea is capable of repeated long distance dispersal, up to 8000 km, even though the fruits and seeds are not of a type normally associated with this phenomenon.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".