Data from: Historical mitochondrial genome introgression confounds species delimitation—evidence from phylogenetic inference in the Odorrana grahami species complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species delimitation is essential to informing conservation policy and understanding ecological and evolutionary processes. Most of our recent gains in knowledge on animal diversity rely on morphological characteristics and mitochondrial (mt) DNA variation. Concordant results based on both have led to an unprecedented acceleration in the identification of new species and enriched the field of taxonomy. However, discordances are also found commonly between morphological and mtDNA evidence. This confounds species delimitation, especially when gene flow or mitochondrial genome introgression has occurred. Here we illustrate how mitochondrial genome introgression among species of the Odorrana grahami complex confounds species delimitation using the combined evidence of morphological characters, mitochondrial variation, and thousands of nuclear single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS). Fifty-eight samples across the distribution of the O. grahami complex were included. The mtDNA matrilineal genealogy indicated two clades, with O. grahami and O. junlianensis clustered together. In contrast, all nuclear evidence including gene trees, species trees, and genetic structure analyses based on GBS data support three species with distinct genetic clusters. These three distinct genetic clusters also correspond to distinct morphological characters. They affirm the distinct taxonomic entities of both O. grahami and O. junlianensis, as well as a third clade distinct from either. Which species the third clade belongs to remains unclear and will require further testing. The nuclear genomic loci contradict the COI evidence, with indications of rampant historical mitochondrial genome introgression among the species of the O. grahami complex. These discordant signals previously confused species delimitation efforts in this group. Based on these findings, we recommend the integration of independent data, especially nuclear genomic evidence, in species delimitation so as to be robust against the pitfalls of mitochondrial introgression.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".