Patterns of Phenotypic Evolution Associated with Marine/Freshwater Transitions in Fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evolutionary transitions between marine and freshwater ecosystems have occurred repeatedly throughout the phylogenetic history of fishes. The theory of ecological opportunity predicts that lineages that colonize species-poor regions will have greater potential for phenotypic diversification than lineages invading species-rich regions. Thus, transitions between marine and freshwaters may promote phenotypic diversification in trans-marine/freshwater fish clades. We used phylogenetic comparative methods to analyze body size data in nine major fish clades that have crossed the marine/freshwater boundary. We explored how habitat transitions, ecological opportunity, and community interactions influenced patterns of phenotypic diversity. Our analyses indicated that transitions between marine and freshwater habitats did not drive body size evolution, and there are few differences in body size between marine and freshwater lineages. We found that body size disparity in freshwater lineages is not correlated with the number of independent transitions to freshwaters. We found a positive correlation between body size disparity and overall species richness of a given area, and a negative correlation between body size disparity and diversity of closely related species. Our results indicate that the diversity of incumbent freshwater species does not restrict phenotypic diversification, but the diversity of closely related taxa can limit body size diversification. Ecological opportunity arising from colonization of novel habitats does not seem to have a major effect in the trajectory of body size evolution in trans-marine/freshwater clades. Moreover, competition with closely related taxa in freshwaters has a greater effect than competition with distantly related incumbent species.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".