MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034103237 · doi:10.18473/lepi.74i2.a3

Back to the Future: Updates on the Invasion History of Junonia Butterflies in Florida and the Mystery of Chokoloskee

2020· article· en· W3034103237 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie M. L. Lalonde, Jeffrey M. Marcus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainlandGeographyPopulationEcologyBiologyArchaeologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tropical buckeye, Junonia zonalis (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) is a recent addition to the butterfly fauna of mainland Florida. It appears that this species began to invade the mainland from the Florida Keys or Cuba by the 1930s, hybridizing with J. coenia and bringing with it mitochondrial haplotype group A, which is common in the Caribbean but is essentially absent from North American Junonia. By the 1940s, J. zonalis appears to have established populations in Miami, but eventually may have been extirpated. Later, new populations of J. zonalis may have become established on mainland Florida by subsequent waves of J. zonalis migrants. Substantial fluctuations in both population size and mitochondrial haplotype group A frequency seem to be characteristic of Florida mainland populations of J. zonalis. Populations of J. zonalis in the Florida Keys and Cuba have maintained nearly constant mitochondrial haplotype group A frequencies over many decades and may be more stable than those on the Florida mainland. Junonia zonalis specimens attributed to Chokoloskee, Florida, from the early 1900s have questionable provenance. Based on their haplotype frequency and other evidence these Chokoloskee specimens may have been collected in Cuba. Similarly, one specimen of J. zonalis likely collected during the 1880s and labeled “Indian River, Fla.” probably also originated from outside of Florida.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Lepidopterists’ SocietySame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207