Long‐distance dispersal explains the bipolar disjunction in <i>Carex macloviana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: The sedge Carex macloviana d'Urv presents a bipolar distribution. To clarify the origin of its distribution, we consider the four main hypotheses: long‐distance dispersal (either by mountain hopping or by direct dispersal), vicariance, parallel evolution, and human introduction. METHODS: Phylogenetic, phylogeographic, and divergence time estimation analyses were carried out based on two nuclear ribosomal (ETS and ITS) regions, one nuclear single copy gene (CATP), and three plastid DNA regions ( rps 16 and 5′ trn K introns, and psb A ‐trn H spacer), using Bayesian inference, maximum likelihood, and statistical parsimony. Bioclimatic data were used to characterize the climatic niche of C . macloviana . KEY RESULTS: Carex macloviana constitutes a paraphyletic species, dating back to the Pleistocene (0.62 Mya, 95% highest posterior density: 0.29–1.00 Mya). This species displays strong genetic structure between hemispheres, with two different lineages in the Southern Hemisphere and limited genetic differentiation in Northern Hemisphere populations. Also, populations from the Southern Hemisphere show a narrower climatic niche with regards to the Northern Hemisphere populations. CONCLUSIONS: Carex macloviana reached its bipolar distribution by long‐distance dispersal, although it was not possible to determine whether it was caused by mountain hopping or by direct dispersal. While there is some support that Carex macloviana might have colonized the Northern Hemisphere by south‐to‐north transhemisphere dispersal during the Pleistocene, unlike the southwards dispersal pattern inferred for other bipolar Carex L. species, we cannot entirely rule out north‐to‐south dispersion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".