MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954314377 · doi:10.1002/ece3.5402

Sympatric speciation in the <i>Simulium arcticum</i> s. l. complex (Diptera: Simuliidae): The Rothfels model updated

2019· article· en· W2954314377 on OpenAlexaff
Gerald F. Shields, William S. Procunier

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSympatric speciationBiologyBlack flyTaxonSympatryGenetic algorithmEcologyEvolutionary biologyLarvaZoology

Abstract

Abstract We tested the Rothfels sympatric speciation model for black flies by comparing all available data for sex‐chromosome diversity with the geographic locations of larval collection sites within the Simulium arcticum complex of black flies (Diptera: Simuliidae). Five separate data sets equaling about 20,000 larvae were included from throughout the geographic range of this complex. We record a total of 31 taxa having unique sex chromosomes, all of which demonstrate linkage disequilibrium with most taxa sharing autosomal polymorphisms. All siblings share portions of their distributions with S. negativum , the presumed oldest member of the complex. Twenty‐one of 22 cytotypes have distributions within the ranges of siblings thus supporting the sympatric speciation model of Rothfels. Chromosomally diverse sites may require analysis of as many as 200 larvae to be properly described. There is no effect of any inversions influencing the occurrence of other inversions. Finally, we report a new cytotype, Simulium arcticum IIL‐6, which we originally discovered in Alaska. Aspects of future genomic research are discussed as they relate to the main chromosomal structural/functional tenants of the model. OPEN RESEARCH BADGE This article has earned an Open Data Badge for making publicly available the digitally‐shareable data necessary to reproduce the reported results. The data are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7719398

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Tests a sympatric speciation model in black flies using sex-chromosome data; an evolutionary-biology question.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

It tests a biological speciation model in black flies, not research itself.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Evolutionary genetics of black-fly speciation; organismal biology (open-data badge is incidental).

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207