MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The butterfly subfamily Pseudopontiinae is not monobasic: marked genetic diversity and morphology reveal three new species of <i>Pseudopontia</i> (Lepidoptera: Pieridae)

2010· article· en· W2166104115 on OpenAlexaff
Kim T. Mitter, Torben Bjerregaard Larsen, Willy De Prins, Jurate De Prins, Steve C. Collins, GAËL VANDE WEGHE, Szabolcs Sáfián, Evgeny V. Zakharov, David J. Hawthorne, Akito Y. Kawahara, Jerome C. Regier

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Entomology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologySubspeciesMonophylyPieridaeZoologyPhylogenetic treeBotanyLepidoptera genitaliaGeneCladeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Afrotropical butterfly subfamily Pseudopontiinae (Pieridae) was traditionally thought to comprise one species, with two subspecies ( Pseudopontia paradoxa paradoxa Felder &amp; Felder and Pseudopontia paradoxa australis Dixey) differing in a single detail of a hindwing vein. The two subspecies also differ in their known geographic distributions (mainly north of versus south of the equator). Unlike most butterflies, Pseudopontia is white with no visible wing or body markings. We now report that males of P. paradoxa australis have an area of ultraviolet‐reflecting scales along the anal vein of the forewing, whereas males of P. paradoxa paradoxa and all females do not. A total of 21 individuals of the northern subspecies, which were collected in three localities south of the equator, were found in the collection of the Royal Museum for Central Africa, indicating sympatry of the two traditional subspecies in the Congo River basin. To determine if additional cryptic species might be present, we sequenced three nuclear genes ( CAD , DDC and wingless ) as well as cytochrome oxidase I ( COI ), examined amplified fragment‐length polymorphisms, and re‐examined wing and genitalic morphology, using recently collected specimens from several regions of Africa. Phylogenetic analyses of the COI sequences and amplified fragment‐length polymorphism data concur, and indicate the existence of at least five monophyletic, non‐interbreeding populations, with a particularly deep divergence between three populations of P. paradoxa paradoxa and two of P. paradoxa australis. Despite the slow rate of evolution of the nuclear genes studied, individual gene trees and a concatenated three‐gene tree demonstrate, with high bootstrap support, clear divergence among the five populations of Pseudopontia . In addition, consistent variations in details of wing vein stalks were found among four of the genetically distinct populations, which supports the hypothesis of multiple species. Division of Pseudopontia into five phylogenetic species is proposed, including the elevation of ssp. australis to species rank and the description of Pseudopontia mabira , Pseudopontia gola and Pseudopontia zambezi

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic EntomologySame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207