MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791924229 · doi:10.7717/peerj.4543

Cenozoic aridization in Central Eurasia shaped diversification of toad-headed agamas ( <i>Phrynocephalus</i> ; Agamidae, Reptilia)

2018· article· en· W2791924229 on OpenAlexaff
Evgeniya N. Solovyeva, Vladimir S. Lebedev, E. A. Dunayev, Roman A. Nazarov, А. А. Банникова, Jing Che, Robert W. Murphy, Nikolay A. Poyarkov

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgamidaeBiologyBiogeographyMonophylyCladeZoologyEcologyEvolutionary biologyPhylogenetic treeLizard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We hypothesize the phylogenetic relationships of the agamid genus Phrynocephalus to assess how past environmental changes shaped the evolutionary and biogeographic history of these lizards and especially the impact of paleogeography and climatic factors. Phrynocephalus is one of the most diverse and taxonomically confusing lizard genera. As a key element of Palearctic deserts, it serves as a promising model for studies of historical biogeography and formation of arid habitats in Eurasia. We used 51 samples representing 33 of 40 recognized species of Phrynocephalus covering all major areas of the genus. Molecular data included four mtDNA ( COI , ND2 , ND4 , Cytb ; 2,703 bp) and four nuDNA protein-coding genes ( RAG1 , BDNF , AKAP9 , NKTR ; 4,188 bp). AU-tests were implemented to test for significant differences between mtDNA- and nuDNA-based topologies. A time-calibrated phylogeny was estimated using a Bayesian relaxed molecular clock with nine fossil calibrations. We reconstructed the ancestral area of origin, biogeographic scenarios, body size, and the evolution of habitat preference. Phylogenetic analyses of nuDNA genes recovered a well-resolved and supported topology. Analyses detected significant discordance with the less-supported mtDNA genealogy. The position of Phrynocephalus mystaceus conflicted greatly between the two datasets. MtDNA introgression due to ancient hybridization best explained this result. Monophyletic Phrynocephalus contained three main clades: (I) oviparous species from south-western and Middle Asia; (II) viviparous species of Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau (QTP); and (III) oviparous species of the Caspian Basin, Middle and Central Asia. Phrynocephalus originated in late Oligocene (26.9 Ma) and modern species diversified during the middle Miocene (14.8–13.5 Ma). The reconstruction of ancestral areas indicated that Phrynocephalus originated in Middle East–southern Middle Asia. Body size miniaturization likely occurred early in the history of Phrynocephalus . The common ancestor of Phrynocephalus probably preferred sandy substrates with the inclusion of clay or gravel. The time of Agaminae radiation and origin of Phrynocephalus in the late Oligocene significantly precedes the landbridge between Afro-Arabia and Eurasia in the Early Miocene. Diversification of Phrynocephalus coincides well with the mid-Miocene climatic transition when a rapid cooling of climate drove progressing aridification and the Paratethys salinity crisis. These factors likely triggered the spreading of desert habitats in Central Eurasia, which Phrynocephalus occupied. The origin of the viviparous Tibetan clade has been associated traditionally with uplifting of the QTP; however, further studies are needed to confirm this. Progressing late Miocene aridification, the decrease of the Paratethys Basin, orogenesis, and Plio–Pleistocene climate oscillations likely promoted further diversification within Phrynocephalus . We discuss Phrynocephalus taxonomy in scope of the new analyses.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207