Genetic, bioacoustic and morphological analyses reveal cryptic speciation in the warbling vireo complex ( <i>Vireo gilvus</i> : Vireonidae: Passeriformes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cryptic species are closely related taxa that are difficult to separate morphologically, but are reproductively isolated. Here we examine the warbling vireo complex (Vireo gilvus), a widespread songbird speculated to be comprised of more than one cryptic species. We included three taxa within the complex: two of the western (Vireo gilvus swainsonii and Vireo gilvus brewsteri) subspecies and the single eastern (Vireo gilvus gilvus) subspecies. We used mtDNA and microsatellite loci to assess the congruence of genetic data to the current subspecies boundaries. We then incorporated bioacoustic, morphometric and ecological niche modelling analyses to further examine differences. We found two genetic groups with mtDNA analysis, splitting eastern and western warbling vireos. Microsatellite analyses revealed four genetic groups: an eastern group, a Black Hills group and two western groups that do not agree with current western subspecies boundaries based on phenotypic data. Our results suggest that eastern and western warbling vireos have been reproductively isolated for a long period of time and therefore may be best treated as separate species. However, more research into areas of contact to examine the presence of hybridization is advised before making a taxonomic revision. Differences between the two western genetic groups appear less clear, requiring additional research.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".