Was Gordon Robilliard right? Integrative systematics suggest that <i>Dendronotus diversicolor</i> (multicolor frond-aeolis) is a valid species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nudibranch molluscs of the genus Dendronotus Alder and Hancock, 1845 are widely distributed in the Northern Hemisphere. Taxonomic studies on the genus Dendronotus have been problematic due to high variability in the colour pattern of many species, as well as in the external morphology and anatomy. In the present paper, we studied specimens of Dendronotus from northern Pacific presumably belonging to the species Dendronotus albus MacFarland, 1966 (white frond-aeolis). Molecular and morphological data revealed the existence of two distinct species among the material examined: D. albus, which has a wide range from Kamchatka and the Kurile Islands (from where we report this species for the first time) to California in North America, and the pseudocryptic species Dendronotus diversicolor Robilliard, 1970 (multicolor frond-aeolis), which has been previously considered a junior synonym of D. albus. Dendronotus diversicolor occurs from California, USA, to British Columbia, Canada, in sympatry with D. albus. Dendronotus albus and D. diversicolor can be clearly distinguished by colour pattern, internal and external morphology, and molecular sequence data. Despite some similarities in radular and external morphology between D. albus and D. diversicolor, these two species are phylogenetically distant and belong to different clades within the genus Dendronotus, which suggests convergent evolution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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".