Understanding the diversity and phylogenetic placements of New Zealand amphipods within a global context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Amphipods are an ecologically diverse group of crustaceans. Due to the limited number of fossil data and common morphological homoplasy, molecular data can be very useful to understand their evolutionary relationships and history. However, despite their global distribution and an increasing number of phylogenetic studies, molecular data from the Southern Hemisphere is considerably limited. Here, I report multigene data (18S, 28S, and COI) of New Zealand endemic freshwater families as well as some other marine taxa. Also, I report two new species/genera that have not been described yet. Phylogenetic analyses were conducted including major amphipod groups to understand phylogenetic placements of New Zealand amphipods. Based on the ML and Bayesian trees, Paracallipe , Paraleptamphopus , and the two unknown species belong to the eusiroids/iphimedioids clade; Parorchestia and a talitrid species clearly belong to talitroids; Paracorophium and Monocorophium were placed within corophiids; Themisto belongs to physosomatans; Josephosella was closely related to other hadzoids. The present study suggests that the Southern and Northern Hemisphere freshwater amphipods are likely to have originated from different marine ancestors. Molecular data from other regions in the Southern Hemisphere will be highly valuable for understanding the phylogeographic histories of amphipods that have shaped the current diversity and distribution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".