Reconstructing the phylogeny of new world monkeys (platyrrhini): evidence from multiple non-coding loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) comprise 3 families and 7 subfamilies, which radiated within a relatively short time period. Accordingly, their phylogenetic relationships are still largely disputed. In the present study, 56 nuclear non-coding loci, including 33 introns (INs) and 23 intergenic regions (IGs), from 20 NWM individuals representing 18 species were used to investigate phylogenetic relationships among families and subfamilies. Of the 56 loci, 43 have not been used in previous NWM phylogenetics. We applied concatenation and coalescence tree-inference methods, and a recently proposed question-specific approach to address NWM phylogeny. Our results indicate incongruence between concatenation and coalescence methods for the IN and IG datasets. However, a consensus was reached with a single tree topology from all analyses of combined INs and IGs as well as all analyses of question-specific loci using both concatenation and coalescence methods, albeit with varying degrees of statistical support. In detail, our results indicated the sister-group relationships between the families Atelidae and Pitheciidae, and between the subfamilies Aotinae and Callithrichinae among Cebidae. Our study provides insights into the disputed phylogenetic relationships among NWM families and subfamilies from the perspective of multiple non-coding loci and various tree-inference approaches. However, the present phylogenetic framework needs further evaluation by adding more independent sequence data and a deeper taxonomic sampling. Overall, our work has important implications for phylogenetic studies dealing with rapid radiations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".