Phylogenetic position of <i>Drosophila bocainensis</i> (Diptera, Drosophilidae) in the <i>willistoni</i> group and the paraphyletic status of the <i>bocainensis</i> subgroup
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The willistoni group of Drosophila is subdivided into the alagitans, bocainensis, and willistoni subgroups, and has been an important model for studying evolutionary processes in the Neotropics for decades. Phylogenetic studies place the bocainensis subgroup as a grade in relation to the monophyletic willistoni subgroup, although these included molecular or morphological data for up to 4 species of the 12 species included in the first subgroup. Here, we characterized the first nucleotide sequences for three mitochondrial and five nuclear genes of Drosophila bocainensis Pavan & da Cunha, 1947 and employed these for addressing the paraphyly of this subgroup under a coalescent approach. Our results still recovered this paraphyletic relationship, placing D. bocainensis, Drosophila capricorni Dobzhansky & Pavan, 1943 and Drosophila sucinea Patterson & Mainland, 1944 in a basal clade, which diverged around 6.81 million years ago. The relationship of Drosophila nebulosa Sturtevant, 1916 and Drosophila fumipennis Duda, 1925 as a sister clade to the willistoni subgroup was recovered. The possible causes of such paraphyly are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it