Diversification in the Neotropical cichlid genus Cichla (Perciformes: Cichlidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
phylogenetic analyses based on mitochondrial DNA sequence data support the distinction of two main clade s of Cichla.The first includes C. temensis and two undescribed species from the lower Amazonas river and its tributary the Xingu river respectively, while the second includes C. orinocensis, C. intermedia, C. monoculus, C' ocellaris, and an undescribed species from the upper Madeira river.The diversification of Cichla species is inferred to result from both vicariance and ecological divergence' and three possible examples of hybridization \ilere observed.Phylogeographic analyses reveal that C. orinocensis sensu stricto shows the greatest relative panmixia, and three of the four species show patterns of range expansion or colonization from the Amazonas to the Orinoco or vice versa.These analyses also suggest that biological characteristics of each species play a significant role in how those populations are genetically structured over the same heterogeneous landscape.Fernández, K. Winemiller, J. Putegnaut, and most especially C' Montaña' Additional assistants too numerous to name provided critical assistance in the f,reld-These researchers provided additional tissues: C. Montaña, I.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".