Hidden diversity within the lizard genus Liolaemus: Genetic vs morphological divergence in the L. rothi complex (Squamata:Liolaeminae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, Liolaemus is the second most species-rich reptile genus in the world (257 species), and predictions of its real diversity suggest that it may be the most diverse genus. Originally, Liolaemus species were described as widely distributed and morphologically variable taxa, but extensive sampling in previously unexplored geographic areas, coupled with molecular and more extensive morphological studies, have discovered an unexpectedly high number of previously undetected species. Here, we study the level of molecular vs. morphological divergence within the L. rothi complex, combining a total of 14 loci (2 mitochondrial and 12 nuclear loci) for 97 individuals, as well as morphological data (nine morphometric and 15 color pattern variables), that represent all six described species of the L. rothi complex, plus two candidate species. We use the multi-coalescent species delimitation program iBPP and resolve strong differences in molecular divergence; and each species is inferred as an independent lineage supported by high posterior probabilities. However, morphological differences are not that clear, and our modeling of morphological characters suggests differential selection pressures implying some level of morphological stasis. We discuss the role of natural selection on phenotypic traits, which may be an important factor in "hiding" the real diversity of the 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".