MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular Phylogeny of Selected Eurasian Podismine Grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae)

2001· article· en· W2170550154 on OpenAlexafffund
G. Litzenberger, W. Chapco

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrthoptera Research and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiologyMonophylySubfamilyClitellataZoologyGenusEvolutionary biologyGrasshopperPhylogeneticsCladeEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The grasshopper subfamily Melanoplinae, comprising a large number of genera and species, maintains a distribution throughout Eurasia and the New World. Despite various attempts to subdivide the subfamily, taxonomic assignments within the Melanoplinae remain unclear. However, the placement of Eurasian and related Nearctic genera within a separate tribe, Podismini, is a common feature within most proposed taxonomic schemes. The Podismini have been independently divided into two and four subtribes on the basis of cytogenetic and morphological traits, respectively; however, the two schemes differ with respect to the placement of certain genera. This study analyses sequence data obtained from portions of four mitochondrial genes (cyt b, COII, ND2, and COI) to (1) test the hypothesis that Eurasian podismines are monophyletic and (2) examine which, if any, of the proposed subtribal affiliations is correct. The view that the nominate genus, Podisma, represents a form closely related to the ancestral podismine stock was also examined. Parsimony, neighbor-joining, and likelihood tree construction methods demonstrate strong support for claims of Eurasian podismine monophyly. Application of the molecular clock method places the separation from North American melanoplines at ≈62 mya. Neither cytogenetic nor morphological subtribal assignations of genera within Podismini is supported by molecular data. Lastly, our analysis shows that Podisma, rather than occupying a basal position among the podismines as suggested in the literature, is a more recently evolved genus.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicOrthoptera Research and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207