MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386316777 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2023-0054

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

2023· article· en· W4386316777 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Henrique Antoniolli, Maríndia Deprá, Vera Lúcia da Silva Valente

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsParaphylyBiologyMonophylyDrosophila (subgenus)CladePhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyZoologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207