MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229081641 · doi:10.1111/cla.12487

Molecular phylogeny and evolution of Calaphidinae (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

2021· article· en· W4229081641 on OpenAlexaff
Yerim Lee, Mariusz Kanturski, Robert G. Foottit, Sora Kim, Seunghwan Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCladistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaRural Development Administration
KeywordsBiologyParaphylyMonophylyPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsCladeSister groupZoologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calaphidinae is the second-largest subfamily in the family Aphididae. Despite their species diversity and some taxonomic controversy, no phylogenetic studies have been conducted on them thus far. Herein, we report the first molecular phylogeny of Calaphidinae and two related lineages, Phyllaphidinae and Saltusaphidinae, based on five genes (3418 bp) for 126 taxa. Maximum parsimony, maximum-likelihood and Bayesian inference phylogenetic analyses were performed on the multilocus dataset. Divergence time estimation, biogeographical reconstruction, ancestral host plant reconstruction and PhyloType analyses were performed to identify evolutionary trends in Calaphidinae. Our phylogenetic results lead to several conclusions: Phyllaphidinae is a sister group to Calaphidinae s.l.; Calaphidinae is paraphyletic with respect to the former "Saltusaphidinae"; the ingroup clade was subdivided into nine newly recognized lineages; and three subtribes of Calaphidinae (Monaphidina, Calaphdina and Panaphidina) and many genera were not recovered as monophyletic. A new classification is proposed with eight tribal divisions that reflect our phylogenetic results, including three new tribes (Pterocallidini trib.n., Pseudochromaphidini trib.n. and Shivaphidini trib.n.) and three new statuses (Saltusaphidini stat.n., Therioaphidini stat.n. and Myzocallidini stat.n.). The ancestral reconstruction results imply that the ingroup taxa's common ancestor originated in the Eastern Palaearctic and might have fed on Fagaceae in the Late Cretaceous. Later, multiple host shifts and an expanding geographical distribution led to the current species diversity of Calaphidinae. Our reconstructions suggest that species diversification cannot solely be explained by speciation via host shifts and that geographical isolation probably also played a key role. Our results provide new insight into the natural classification and history of the host plant associations and biogeography of Calaphidinae s.l.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCladisticsSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207