Out of Amazonia again and again: episodic crossing of the Andes promotes diversification in a lowland forest flycatcher
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most Neotropical lowland forest taxa occur exclusively on one side of the Andes despite the availability of appropriate habitat on both sides. Almost all molecular phylogenies and phylogenetic analyses of species assemblages (i.e. area cladograms) have supported the hypothesis that Andean uplift during the Late Pliocene created a vicariant barrier affecting lowland lineages in the region. However, a few widespread plant and animal species occurring in lowland forests on both sides of the Andes challenge the generality of this hypothesis. To understand the role of the Andes in the history of such organisms, we reconstructed the phylogeographic history of a widespread Neotropical flycatcher (Mionectes oleagineus) in the context of the other four species in the genus. A molecular phylogeny based on nuclear and mitochondrial sequences unambiguously showed an early basal split between montane and lowland Mionectes. The phylogeographic reconstruction of lowland taxa revealed a complex history, with multiple cases in which geographically proximate populations do not represent sister lineages. Specifically, three populations of M. oleagineus west of the Andes do not comprise a monophyletic clade; instead, each represents an independent lineage with origins east of the Andes. Divergence time estimates suggest that at least two cross-Andean dispersal events post-date Andean uplift.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".