The radiation of Hymenoptera illuminated by Bayesian inferences from the fossil record
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining when lineages originated provides fundamental insights into the timing and pace of their diversification, improving our understanding of transformative paleoevents such as the Angiosperm Terrestrial Revolution (ATR) 1 and Mid-Mesozoic Parasitoid Revolution (MMPR). 2 As the MMPR overlaps with the ATR, improved age estimates help to disentangle the dynamics and temporal succession of these events that shaped modern ecosystems. Hymenoptera (ants, bees, and wasps) played an important role in the MMPR and ATR through their parasitoid and pollinating lineages. Parasitoids impact trophic networks, whereas pollinators interact with flowering plants. 3 , 4 However, our understanding of Hymenoptera diversification remains limited by a lack of fossil-based studies and uncertainties in phylogenetic reconstructions. Combining fossil occurrences and macroevolutionary models, we estimated the origin and diversification of Hymenoptera lineages, considering changes in preservation over time and across taxa. 5 , 6 , 7 Our results indicate that Hymenoptera diversification is multifaceted and lineage-specific. Sawflies diversified during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic in four episodes (middle Permian, Late Triassic to Middle Jurassic, Early Cretaceous, and the beginning of the Cenozoic) and experienced three extinction episodes (Middle Triassic, Late Jurassic, and mid-Cretaceous). The superfamily Xyeloidea originated during the middle Permian. Apocrita and parasitoid superfamilies emerged during the Early to Middle Triassic, diversified during the Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous, and declined during the Late Cretaceous. We demonstrate that Hymenoptera experienced successive replacements during the MMPR—likely beginning in the Triassic—and synchronously with changes in floral assemblages of the ATR. We conclude with future directions to refine dating estimates from the fossil record.
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 | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".