MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170962149 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2006.0606

Phylogenetic relationships and divergence times of Charadriiformes genera: multigene evidence for the Cretaceous origin of at least 14 clades of shorebirds

2007· article· en· W2170962149 on OpenAlexafffund
Allan J. Baker, Sérgio L. Pereira, Tara Paton

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyCharadriiformesSister groupPhylogenetic treeMonophylyCladeZoologyTaxonPhylogeneticsLineage (genetic)Evolutionary biologyPloverEcologyMolecular phylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparative study of character evolution in the shorebirds is presently limited because the phylogenetic placement of some enigmatic genera remains unclear. We therefore used Bayesian methods to obtain a well-supported phylogeny of 90 recognized genera using 5 kb of mitochondrial and nuclear sequences. The tree comprised three major clades: Lari (gulls, auks and allies plus buttonquails) as sister to Scolopaci (sandpipers, jacanas and allies), and in turn sister to Charadrii (plovers, oystercatchers and allies), as in previous molecular studies. Plovers and noddies were not recovered as monophyletic assemblages, and the Egyptian plover Pluvianus is apparently not a plover. Molecular dating using multiple fossil constraints suggests that the three suborders originated in the late Cretaceous between 79 and 102 Mya, and at least 14 lineages of modern shorebirds survived the mass extinction at the K/T boundary. Previous difficulties in determining the phylogenetic relationships of enigmatic taxa reflect the fact that they are well-differentiated relicts of old, genus-poor lineages. We refrain from suggesting systematic revisions for shorebirds at this time because gene trees may fail to recover the species tree when long branches are connected to deep, shorter branches, as is the case for some of the enigmatic taxa.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations217
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207