Data from: Colour pattern homology and evolution in Vanessa butterflies (Nymphalidae: Nymphalini): eyespot characters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ocelli are serially repeated colour patterns on the wings of many butterflies. Eyespots are elaborate ocelli that function in predator avoidance and deterrence as well as in mate choice. A phylogenetic approach was used to study ocelli and eyespot evolution in Vanessa butterflies, a genus exhibiting diverse phenotypes among these serial homologs. Forty-four morphological characters based on eyespot number, arrangement, shape, and the number of elements in each eyespot were defined and scored. Ocelli from eight wing cells on the dorsal and ventral surfaces of the forewing and hindwing were evaluated. The evolution of these characters was traced over a phylogeny of Vanessa based on 7750 DNA base pairs from 10 genes. Our reconstruction predicts that the ancestral Vanessa had 5 serially arranged ocelli on all four wing surfaces. The ancestral state on the dorsal forewing and ventral hindwing was ocelli arranged in two heterogeneous groups. On the dorsal hindwing, the ancestral state was either homogenous or ocelli arranged in two heterogeneous groups. On the ventral forewing, we determined that the ancestral state was organized into three heterogeneous groups. In Vanessa, almost all ocelli are individuated and capable of independent evolution relative to other colour patterns except for the ocelli in cells -1 and 0 on the dorsal and ventral forewings, which appear to be constrained to evolve in parallel. The genus Vanessa is a good model system for the study of serial homology and the interaction of selective forces with developmental architecture to produce diversity in butterfly colour patterns.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".