Xenopus fraseri: Mr. Fraser, where did your frog come from?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive, accurate, and revisable alpha taxonomy is crucial for biodiversity studies, but is challenging when data from reference specimens are difficult to collect or observe. However, recent technological advances can overcome some of these challenges. To illustrate this, we used modern approaches to tackle a centuries-old taxonomic enigma presented by Fraser's Clawed Frog, Xenopus fraseri, including whether X. fraseri is different from other species, and if so, where it is situated geographically and phylogenetically. To facilitate these inferences, we used high-resolution techniques to examine morphological variation, and we generated and analyzed complete mitochondrial genome sequences from all Xenopus species, including >150-year-old type specimens. Our results demonstrate that X. fraseri is indeed distinct from other species, firmly place this species within a phylogenetic context, and identify its minimal geographic distribution in northern Ghana and northern Cameroon. These data also permit novel phylogenetic resolution into this intensively studied and biomedically important group. Xenopus fraseri was formerly thought to be a rainforest endemic placed alongside species in the amieti species group; in fact this species occurs in arid habitat on the borderlands of the Sahel, and is the smallest member of the muelleri species group. This study illustrates that the taxonomic enigma of Fraser's frog was a combined consequence of sparse collection records, interspecies conservation and intraspecific polymorphism in external anatomy, and type specimens with unusual morphology.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".