The Taxonomy and Population Structure of the Buckeye Butterflies (Genus<i>Junonia</i>, Nymphalidae: Nymphalini) of Florida, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The buckeye butterflies (genus Junonia) that occur in Florida, USA have been an ongoing taxonomic challenge for over 100 years. Schwartz (1987. Milwaukee Pub. Mus. Contrib. Biol. Geol. 73: 21) described the situation succinctly: “No other lepidopteran on the Florida Keys nor in south Florida, presents the taxonomic problems as Junonia.” The current consensus recognizes 3 different forms of Junonia in Florida based on morphological characters, but there is a general lack of consensus regarding the appropriate scientific names for each form. Similarities between the species that occur in Florida, intraspecific variation, and possible hybridization between species have often made it challenging to identify specimens, define the population structure of Junonia butterflies, or to understand the relationships of these butterfly populations to those elsewhere in the New World. We use a combination of morphological characters, mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I barcodes, nuclear wingless DNA sequences, and randomly amplified DNA fingerprints from Junonia from Florida, the Caribbean, and North and South America to resolve issues of taxonomy and population structure in this genus. We conclude that the common buckeye (J. coenia), the mangrove buckeye (J. neildi), and the tropical buckeye (J. zonalis) occur in Florida and that hybridization between these species takes place in this region.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".