The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 9 of the 69 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Morphological Variation in Wild Marmosets (Callithrix penicillata and C. geoffroyi) and Their Hybrids
Abstract
Evolutionary theory and observation predict wider phenotypic variation in hybrids than parental species. Emergent phenotypic novelty in hybrids may in turn drive new adaptations or speciation by breaking parental phenotypic constraints. Primate hybridization is often documented through genetic evidence, but knowledge about the primate hybrid phenotype remains limited due to a small number of available studies on hybrid primate morphology. Here, we examine pelage and morphometric variation in two Brazilian marmoset species (Callithrix penicillata and C. geoffroyi) and their hybrids. Hybrids were sampled in an anthropogenic hybrid zone in the municipality of Viçosa, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. We analyzed hybrid facial and body pelage color variation, and compared 13 morphometric measures between hybrids and parental species. Five different hybrid facial morphotypes were observed, varying from intermediate to parental-like. Hybrid facial morphotypes were biased towards C. penicillata, suggesting that the pelage of this species may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi in this context, and indicating that mate preference, and therefore gene flow/introgression, may be biased towards C. penicillata within the hybrid zone. Hybrid morphometric features were on average intermediate to parental species traits, but transgressive hybrids were also observed, suggesting that morphometric variation for the studied traits is consistent with Rieseberg’s complementary allele model. Finally, we observed a decoupling of facial patterning and size/shape in hybrids, relative to parent phenotypes, suggesting that an important factor driving phenotypic novelty within the Viçosa marmoset hybrid zone might be the loosening of evolutionary constraints on phenotypic trait integration.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This study examines pelage and morphometric variation in wild *Callithrix penicillata*, *C. geoffroyi*, and their hybrids in an anthropogenic hybrid zone in Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Hybrids showed five facial morphotypes biased toward *C. penicillata*, generally intermediate but mosaic morphometrics, some transgressive individuals, and decoupling of facial patterning from body size/shape.
Key findings
- The total sample was 65 individuals: *C. penicillata* (n = 22), *C. geoffroyi* (n = 14), and hybrids (n = 40). Five hybrid facial morphotypes were observed: A 35.5 %, B 16.13 %, C 12.9 %, D 19.35 %, and E 16.13 %; all hybrids had the conspicuous white forehead spot characteristic of *C. penicillata*, and the bias toward *C. penicillata*-like facial patterns suggests possible dominance of *C. penicillata* facial pelage and mate/gene-flow bias toward *C. penicillata*.
- MANOVA indicated significant differences among taxa (n = 60; 5 cases deleted; p < 0.001), and univariate ANOVA was significant for all traits except BODY. *C. geoffroyi* was larger than *C. penicillata* for all measured metric traits. Hybrids were significantly larger than *C. penicillata* for nine traits and not significantly smaller for any; they were significantly smaller than *C. geoffroyi* for five traits (WEIGHT, TAIL, CLCR, ILD, FOD; only WEIGHT and FOD remained significant with Bonferroni correction).
- Hybrids were on average intermediate but mosaic: more *C. penicillata*-like for body mass, head size, and foot length, and more *C. geoffroyi*-like for femur and hand length and ear size. PCA first four components represented 72.97 % of total variation; hybrids showed greater variation than parental taxa, with some individuals outside parental shape space (transgressive), often females.
- The authors found no evidence for heterosis or dysgenesis in the hybrid sample; transgressive hybrids were interpreted as consistent with Rieseberg’s complementary allele model. Facial morphotype A, most *C. penicillata*-like, was the most transgressive in body size/shape, while morphotype C was the only hybrid facial group firmly within the *C. penicillata* size range, suggesting decoupling of facial patterning and size/shape.
Methods
- Wild marmosets were sampled in Brazil: adult *C. penicillata* (13 males, 9 females) from Brasília and Goiânia in the Cerrado; adult *C. geoffroyi* (6 males, 8 females) from Espírito Santo; and hybrids (19 males: 15 adults, 4 juveniles; 21 females: 14 adults, 7 juveniles) from five groups in a 75 ha semi-deciduous submontane forest fragment at the Federal University of Viçosa. Animals were trapped, anesthetized with ketamine hydrochloride (10 mg/kg) and xylazine hydrochloride (0.5 mg/kg), measured, and released.
- Pelage color and pattern were scored across chromogenetic fields by two independent observers, with 95 % inter-observer concordance. Hybrid identification followed Hershkovitz’s facial trait descriptions. Morphometric analyses used only fully adult animals and included 13 traits: body weight plus 12 linear distances.
- Statistical analyses included MANOVA on all 13 traits, univariate ANOVA for each trait, pairwise t tests with Bonferroni-adjusted probabilities, and PCA based on a correlation matrix.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: the study uses only morphological data, lacks information on hybrid status (e.g., F1 vs. backcross), cannot identify cryptic hybrids, and likely underestimates actual hybridization levels at Viçosa. The authors also state that without additional genetic and behavioral data it is difficult to take the results further, and that they did not directly test heterosis because the sample likely comprises wild multigenerational hybrids with unknown pedigrees.
- Evident from the text: sample sizes are uneven across taxa and traits, with missing data leading to deletion of five cases and some trait-specific n values of 21, 28, or 29; the hybrid sample includes juveniles for pelage but not morphometrics; sampling localities differ in ecological context though all are urban or near-urban; and the absence of known pedigrees limits inference about hybrid generation and genetic mechanisms.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
9 of 69 cited sources checked · 4 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11
Based on nuclear data, Callithrix separated from its sister clade of Mico and Cebuella 2.5 million years ago.
“Based on nuclear data, Callithrix separated from its sister clade of Mico and Cebuella 2.5 million years ago (Perelman et al. 2011), and the young age of Callithrix species probably has not yet allowed for the evolution of either distinct coadapted gene complexes or significant differences in allele frequencies between these species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Perelman et al. 2011 source
The Results/Discussion section on New World Primates describes a branching order in which Callithrix precedes Mico and the more derived Cebuella, supporting the claimed relationship. The passages retrieved from our copy do not establish a 2.5-million-year date for that split; searches for the date and the three genera together did not locate one. The citing sentence’s subsequent speculation about gene complexes and allele frequencies is not attributed to Perelman et al. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11
Mitochondrial phylogenies produced for Callithrix species often show evidence of incomplete lineage sorting and unresolved species relationships.
“Further, mitochondrial phylogenies produced for Callithrix species often show evidence of incomplete lineage sorting and unresolved species relationships (e.g., Tagliaro et al. 1997; Malukiewicz 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Tagliaro et al. 1997 source
The Phylogenetics section (page unavailable) reports weakly resolved relationships among C. kuhli, C. jacchus, and C. penicillata, and finds that several purported species are not monophyletic. The Phylogenetics and Conservation Perspectives section (page unavailable) discusses hybridization as a possible explanation, but does not identify incomplete lineage sorting. This study also does not establish that such patterns occur often across Callithrix mitochondrial phylogenies. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Malukiewicz 2013
- Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11
C. penicillata diverged from C. jacchus less than a million years ago.
“For example, C. penicillata diverged from its species C. jacchus less than a million years ago (Perelman et al. 2011), and these two species showed overlapping allele size frequencies and no diagnostic loci between the two species (loci with non-overlapping alleles between the two species) in a panel of 42 nuclear microsatellite loci (Malukiewicz 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Perelman et al. 2011 source
The New World Primates (Platyrrhini) section discusses Callithrix within Callitrichinae, but does not give a divergence date for C. penicillata and C. jacchus. A search for “penicillata” found no matching passage in our copy; the Methods mention C. jacchus only as a species used to test PCR primers. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
Hybrid faces could be divided into five morphotypes, varying from intermediate to parental-like.
“Five different hybrid facial morphotypes were observed, varying from intermediate to parental-like.”
- Also stated in: § Pelage Variation · p. 6 · plain
“Although hybrids faces were polymorphic with respect to color patterning, and the range of variation was continuous, nonetheless they could be generally divided into five morphotypes (Fig. 4) as follows:”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Pelage Variation · p. 6 · plain
- Findingown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
Transgressive hybrids were observed.
“Hybrid morphometric features were on average intermediate to parental species traits, but transgressive hybrids were also observed, suggesting that morphometric variation for the studied traits is consistent with Rieseberg's complementary allele model.”
- Also stated in: § Morphometric Traits · p. 7 · hedged
“However, these results also indicate that for the most part the variation seen in the hybrids does not overlap with that of the parental species (i.e. they are transgressive), and that the overall magnitude of variation seen in the hybrids exceeds that of the parental taxa.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Morphometric Traits · p. 7 · hedged
- Findingown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
Hybrid morphometric features were on average intermediate to parental species traits.
“Hybrid morphometric features were on average intermediate to parental species traits, but transgressive hybrids were also observed, suggesting that morphometric variation for the studied traits is consistent with Rieseberg's complementary allele model.”
- Also stated in: § Morphometric Traits · p. 6 · hedged
“These results indicate that while the hybrids are, on average, intermediate to the two parental taxa, and are similar to both in body length, they are not strictly intermediate.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Morphometric Traits · p. 6 · hedged
- Findingown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
A decoupling of facial patterning and size/shape was observed in hybrids, relative to parent phenotypes.
“Finally, we observed a decoupling of facial patterning and size/shape in hybrids, relative to parent phenotypes, suggesting that an important factor driving phenotypic novelty within the Vic ¸osa marmoset hybrid zone might be the loosening of evolutionary constraints on phenotypic trait integration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
The largest percentage of hybrid individuals possessed a C. penicillata-like facial morphotype for both males and females separately, and as a whole.
“The largest percentage of hybrid individuals possessed a C. penicillata -like facial morphotype for both males and females separately, and as a whole.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 7
There are a few hybrid individuals who are well outside of the shape-space of the parental taxa.
“In particular, there are a few hybrid individuals who are well outside of the shape-space of the parental taxa.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
The authors identified five distinct C. penicillata × C. geoffroyi facial morphotypes in their hybrids, ranging from phenotypes that closely resembled parental species to those that were intermediate between parental phenotypes.
“In contrast, we identified five distinct C. penicillata 9 C. geoffroyi facial morphotypes in our hybrids, ranging from phenotypes that closely resembled parental species to those that were intermediate between parental phenotypes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
Despite this mosaic, hybrids were on average intermediate between the parental taxa for the majority of morphological traits.
“Despite this mosaic, hybrids were on average intermediate between the parental taxa for the majority of morphological traits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
The C. penicillata forehead star is present across the entire range of hybrid facial morphotypes, even those morphotypes that more closely resembled C. geoffroyi.
“The notable presence of the C. penicillata forehead star across our entire range of hybrid facial morphotypes, even those morphotypes that more closely resembled C. geoffroyi , also supports the idea of dominance in facial features of the former species over the latter.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6
The first four PCs represent 72.97% of the total variation.
“Component scores for the individuals are plotted in Fig. 5 for the first four PCs (representing 72.97 % of the total variation).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 8
Only morphotype C falls firmly within the C. penicillata size range.
“Only morphotype C, the most intermediate of the hybrid facial patterning groups, falls firmly within the C. penicillata size range.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9
The authors observed no dominance effects of coat coloration in their studied C. geoffroyi × C. penicillata hybrids.
“However, we observed no such dominance effects of coat coloration in our studied C. geoffroyi 9 C. penicillata hybrids, suggesting that patterns of dominance in coat color may be species specific.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 8
PCA plots show individuals with facial phenotype A (and one individual with unknown coat color/pattern) are the most transgressive group in body size/shape.
“Overall, the PCA plots show individuals possessing facial phenotype A (as well as one individual with unknown coat color/pattern), whose facial patterns are similar to that of C. penicillata , as the most transgressive group in terms of body size/shape.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 7
The two hybrids most extreme in the PC2 versus PC3 plot and in the PC3 versus PC4 plot are also female.
“The two hybrids most extreme in the PC2 versus PC3 plot (bottom and top left of Fig. 5e) and in the PC3 versus PC4 plot (furthest left and right) are also female.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 8
A few individuals with the E facial pattern are at or outside the range of variation of either parental species.
“Additionally, a few individuals with the E facial pattern, which resembles that of C. geoffroyi , are at or outside the range of variation of either parental species.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 5
The tail of all studied individuals displayed a ringed pattern consisting of black, dark grey, and light grey, matching published descriptions for C. geoffroyi and C. penicillata.
“The tail of all studied individuals displayed a ringed pattern consisting of black, dark grey, and light grey (see Fig. 3), matching published descriptions described above for C. geoffroyi and C. penicillata.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
Analysis of morphological trait variation between parental C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi shows that the parental forms are distinct from one another.
“Analysis of morphological trait variation between parental C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi shows that the parental forms are distinct from one another.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
This general pattern was upheld when the sample data were examined in terms of species, sex, and facial coloration phenotypes.
“This general pattern was upheld when our sample data were examined in terms of species, sex, and facial coloration phenotypes (discussed further below).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
Hybrid trait averages were not smaller than both parental trait averages.
“Here, hybrid trait averages were not smaller than both parental trait averages, suggesting that dysgenesis is not present in our hybrid marmoset sample, and therefore that the gene complexes of the parental species are similar.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 6
All C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi hybrids possessed a conspicuous white spot on the forehead and different degrees of light grey and white on the sides of the face, menton region and front half of vertex.
“All C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi hybrids possessed a conspicuous white spot on the forehead (a C. penicillata characteristic) and different degrees of light grey and white on the sides of the face, menton region and front half of vertex.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 5
The upper and lower portions of the back showed a striated pattern composed of orange, dark grey, and light grey similar to the parental species.
“The upper and lower portions of the back showed a striated pattern composed of orange, dark grey, and light grey similar to what can be observed in the upper and lower back pelage of the parental species.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6
The hybrids are not significantly larger than both parental species for any traits.
“The hybrids are not significantly larger than both parental species for any traits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9
All hybrids in the sample were similar to parental species in chromogenetic fields of the arms, legs, back, and tail.
“All hybrids in our sample were similar to parental species in chromogenetic fields of the arms, legs, back, and tail.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6
Callithrix geoffroyi is on average larger than C. penicillata for all measured metric traits.
“Callithrix geoffroyi is on average larger than C. penicillata for all measured metric traits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Conclusion · p. 12
The authors provided some evidence for the breakdown of association between size/shape and color patterning in these hybrids.
“We also provided some evidence for the breakdown of association between size/shape and color patterning in these hybrids.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
Trait values within the hybrid population on average tended to be intermediate between parental taxa values.
“However, trait values within our hybrid population on average tended to be intermediate between parental taxa values.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
Hybrid facial morphotypes were biased towards C. penicillata.
“Hybrid facial morphotypes were biased towards C. penicillata , suggesting that the pelage of this species may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi in this context, and indicating that mate preference, and therefore gene flow/ introgression, may be biased towards C. penicillata within the hybrid zone.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
The pelage of C. penicillata may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi in this context.
“Hybrid facial morphotypes were biased towards C. penicillata , suggesting that the pelage of this species may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi in this context, and indicating that mate preference, and therefore gene flow/ introgression, may be biased towards C. penicillata within the hybrid zone.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
Morphometric variation for the studied traits is consistent with Rieseberg's complementary allele model.
“suggesting that morphometric variation for the studied traits is consistent with Rieseberg's complementary allele model.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationown data§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1
An important factor driving phenotypic novelty within the Viçosa marmoset hybrid zone might be the loosening of evolutionary constraints on phenotypic trait integration.
“Finally, we observed a decoupling of facial patterning and size/shape in hybrids, relative to parent phenotypes, suggesting that an important factor driving phenotypic novelty within the Vic ¸osa marmoset hybrid zone might be the loosening of evolutionary constraints on phenotypic trait integration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8
Current levels of genotypic and phenotypic variation in the Viçosa marmosets derive solely or largely from the founder populations originally introduced into the area, with limited current gene flow from parental species.
“It can be inferred that current levels of genotypic and phenotypic variation in the Vic ¸osa marmosets derive solely or largely from the founder populations originally introduced into the area, with limited current gene flow from parental species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2
C. penicillata is often found in sympatry with several other Callithrix species due to range alterations.
“C. penicillata is one species that is often found in sympatry with several other Callithrix species due to such range alterations (Rylands et al. 1993, 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationnone given§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
The difference between hybrids and parent species in facial but not body patterning reflects the divergence in facial but not body patterning of the parent species themselves.
“It is noteworthy that the hybrids differ from the parent species in facial patterning, but not body patterning; this is undoubtedly a reflection of the divergence in the former (but not the latter) of the parent species themselves.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Pelage Variation · p. 6
Patterns B and C represent hybrids possessing intermediate features between the parental species.
“Patterns B and C represent hybrids possessing intermediate features between the parental species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisereasoning§ Introduction · p. 1
Hybrid populations are expected to show an overall increase in phenotypic variation in relation to pure parental populations.
“Thus, hybrid populations are expected to show an overall increase in phenotypic variation in relation to pure parental populations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
These results support expectations for higher phenotypic variation among hybrids relative to parental populations.
“These results support expectations for higher phenotypic variation among hybrids relative to parental populations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9
The flow of C. penicillata genes into the Viçosa hybrid zone is a remote possibility.
“However, one of us (IOS) has identified C. penicillata groups as close as 39 and 24 km to the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone, and Vic ¸osa itself is located on the cusp of the geographical range of this species, making the flow of C. penicillata genes into the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone a remote possibility.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
These results support the expectation that hybrid populations are more phenotypically variable than their parental populations.
“In short, these results also support the expectation that hybrid populations are more phenotypically variable than their parental populations (Ackermann 2010).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Ackermann 2010 source
- Interpretationown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9
Patterns of dominance in coat color may be species specific.
“However, we observed no such dominance effects of coat coloration in our studied C. geoffroyi 9 C. penicillata hybrids, suggesting that patterns of dominance in coat color may be species specific.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2
Studies of metric morphological traits in wild hybrid populations remain underrepresented in the general primate hybridization literature.
“However, studies of metric morphological traits in wild hybrid populations, exemplified by the work of Froelich and Supriatna (1996) in macaques and Kelaita and Corte ´sOrtiz (2013) in howlers, remain underrepresented in the general primate hybridization literature.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Froelich and Supriatna 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Kelaita and Cortés-Ortiz 2013 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Study design and conductown data§ Marmoset Sampling Locations · p. 4
Examination of stem-and-leaf plots indicates no deviations from normality.
“Examination of stem-and-leaf plots also indicates no deviations from normality.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10
The presence of the C. penicillata forehead star across the range of hybrid facial morphotypes supports the idea of dominance of C. penicillata facial features over C. geoffroyi.
“The notable presence of the C. penicillata forehead star across our entire range of hybrid facial morphotypes, even those morphotypes that more closely resembled C. geoffroyi , also supports the idea of dominance in facial features of the former species over the latter.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
One possible morphometric indicator of dysgenesis in hybrids is trait values below parental trait averages.
“One possible morphometric indicator of dysgenesis in hybrids is trait values below parental trait averages (sensu Kohn et al. 2001; Ackermann et al. 2006).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Study design and conductown data§ Marmoset Sampling Locations · p. 4
A MANOVA including all 13 traits indicates that these variables do not differ significantly among the sexes (p = 0.66).
“A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) including all 13 traits indicates that these variables do not differ significantly among the sexes ( p = 0.66; five individuals deleted due to missing data).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10
Previous primate studies showing evidence for heterosis in primate hybrids were based on early generation hybrid samples with known pedigrees, which allowed for distinction among different kinds of hybrids.
“Previous primate studies showing evidence for heterosis in primate hybrids were based on early generation hybrid samples with known pedigrees (e.g., Cheverud et al. 1993; Kohn et al. 2001; Ackermann et al. 2006), which allowed for distinction among different kinds of hybrids (e.g., F1 vs backcross).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked - Interpretationreasoning§ Conclusion · p. 12
It is likely that levels of hybridization may currently be underestimated at Viçosa.
“Thus it is likely that levels of hybridization may currently be underestimated at Vic ¸osa.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11
As a result, transgressive hybrids show extreme phenotypes relative to parental species in both negative and positive directions.
“As a result, transgressive hybrids show extreme phenotypes relative to parental species in both negative and positive directions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11
Given the mixture of parental traits seen in the hybrid sample, it is plausible that a similar process has also occurred here.
“Given the mixture of parental traits seen in our hybrid sample, it is plausible that a similar process has also occurred here.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ Conclusion · p. 12
The latter leads to underestimation of actual levels of hybridization (or numbers of hybrids) within a population.
“The latter leads to underestimation of actual levels of hybridization (or numbers of hybrids) within a population (Ackermann 2010; Kelaita and Corte ´s-Ortiz 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Premisecitation§ Conclusion · p. 12
Cryptic hybridization has been observed at C. jacchus × C. penicillata hybrid zones where discordance exists between marmosets possessing the phenotype of one parental species and the mitochondrial D-loop haplotype of another species.
“Cryptic hybridization has been observed at C. jacchus 9 C. penicillata hybrid zones where discordance exists between marmosets possessing the phenotype of one parental species and the mitochondrial D-loop haplotype of another species (Malukiewicz 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Malukiewicz 2013
- Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11
These genetic and morphometric data suggest that there is minimal divergence between Callithrix species.
“In summary, these genetic and morphometric data suggest that there is minimal divergence between Callithrix species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Probably not a substantial claim. 42
- It may state two separate claims as one. 51
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation§ Morphological Variation in Wild Marmosets ( Callithrix penicillata and C. geoffroyi ) and Their Hybrids · p. 1Emergent phenotypic novelty in hybrids may drive new adaptations or speciation by breaking parental phenotypic constraints.
“Emergent phenotypic novelty in hybrids may in turn drive new adaptations or speciation by breaking parental phenotypic constraints.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2The New World genus Callithrix is one primate taxon for which reports of recent hybridization have increased substantially.
“The New World genus Callithrix , made up of six species of eastern Brazilian marmosets ( C. jacchus , C. penicillata , C. aurita , C. flaviceps , C. geoffroyi and C. kuhlii ), is one primate taxon for which reports of recent hybridization have increased substantially (e.g., Rylands et al. 1988; Mendes 1997a, b; Passamani et al. 1997; Ruiz-Miranda et al. 2000; Affonso et al. 2004; Ruiz-Miranda et a”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked- cites Rylands et al. 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Mendes 1997a source
The paper reports hybrids at six sites in contact zones involving C. flaviceps and describes these as findings from recent attempts to obtain new information (Abstract; page unavailable). It therefore supports Callithrix as an example with recent hybridization reports, but does not establish that the number of reports increased substantially over time. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Passamani et al. 1997 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Transgressive traits in hybrids are primarily due to the merger of parental genomes comprised of complementary genes with additive effects.
“Transgressive traits in hybrids are primarily due to the merger of parental genomes comprised of complementary genes with additive effects (Rieseberg et al. 1999, 2003).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11It has been suggested and evidenced that hybridization may release evolutionary constraints on phenotypic integration, affecting not only variation in traits but also the relationship between traits.
“It has been suggested and evidenced that hybridization may release evolutionary constraints on phenotypic integration, affecting not only variation in traits but also the relationship between traits (e.g., head shape in African cichlids, Parsons et al. 2011; modularity in mouse mandible, Renaud et al. 2012).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Parsons et al. 2011 source
- cites Renaud et al. 2012 source
The Discussion (‘A mosaic of modules in hybrids’) reports new mandible shapes arising from different combinations of modules, supporting the claim about variation in traits. The Results (‘Integration among modules’) examine relationships between modules, but the Discussion (‘Remodeling as an adjustment between neighboring modules?’) says no general pattern of integration emerged and notes a covariation that persisted in parents and hybrids. The paper therefore does not establish that hybridization released constraints on phenotypic integration. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 7The hybrid individual most extreme in the PC1 versus PC2 plot is a female.
“When considering the sex of the individuals (Fig. 5d-f), the hybrid individual most extreme in the PC1 versus PC2 plot (bottom right of Fig. 5d) is a female.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 6The percentage of hybrid individuals that fell into each morphotype is: A 35.5%, B 16.13%, C 12.9%, D 19.35%, E 16.13%.
“The percentage of hybrid individuals that fell into each morphotype is as follows: A 35.5 %, B 16.13 %, C 12.9 %, D 19.35 %, E 16.13 %.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The hybrids are significantly smaller than C. geoffroyi for five traits; only WEIGHT and FOD remain significant with Bonferroni correction; they are not significantly larger for any traits.
“Conversely, the hybrids are significantly smaller than C. geoffroyi for five traits (WEIGHT, TAIL, CLCR, ILD, FOD; only WEIGHT and FOD remain significant with Bonferroni correction), and are not significantly larger for any traits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Findingnone given§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8Other Viçosa marmoset groups not sampled in this study also show morphological evidence of C. jacchus ancestry.
“Other Vic ¸osa marmoset groups not sampled in this study also show morphological evidence of C. jacchus ancestry.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Hybrids of the two species showed a mosaic of parental traits in being closer to C. penicillata for weight and head size but closer to C. geoffroyi for femur and hand length.
“Hybrids of the two species showed a mosaic of parental traits in being closer to C. penicillata for weight and head size but closer to C. geoffroyi for femur and hand length.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 8All hybrids except group C associate more closely with C. geoffroyi in body size (PC1) than with C. penicillata, despite spanning facial patterning from C. penicillata-like (morphotype A) to C. geoffroyi-like (morphotype E).
“Interestingly, all of the hybrids, with the exception of group C, associate more closely with C. geoffroyi in terms of body size (Fig. 5g; PC1) than they do with C. penicillata , despite spanning the range from C. penicillata -like facial patterning (morphotype A) to C. geoffroyi -like facial patterning (morphotype E).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The first component (PC1) has positive loadings across all variables, indicating that this is an overall size component, with the relatively larger C. geoffroyi at the right side of the axis, and the relatively smaller C. penicillata at the left side.
“The first component (PC1) has positive loadings across all variables, indicating that this is an overall size component, with the relatively larger C. geoffroyi at the right side of the axis, and the relatively smaller C. penicillata at the left side.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 5There were no observed intersexual differences in coat color among the hybrids, and little variation in chromogenetic fields between hybrid individuals outside of the facial region.
“There were no observed intersexual differences in coat color among the hybrids, and indeed little variation in chromogenetic fields between hybrid individuals (outside of the facial region, as discussed below).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The purebred C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi marmosets are significantly different from each other for all of the traits; all but two differences remain significant with a Bonferroni correction.
“Pairwise taxa comparisons conducted with the t test (Table 2) indicate that the purebred C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi marmosets are significantly different from each other for all of the traits; all but two differences remain significant with a Bonferroni correction.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Pelage Variation · p. 5The proximal portions of the arms and legs were grey with orange basal hair, while the distal portions were grey.
“The proximal portions of the arms and legs were grey with orange basal hair, while the distal portions were grey.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingreasoning§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10Hybrids differ from the parent species in facial patterning, but not body patterning.
“It is noteworthy that the hybrids differ from the parent species in facial patterning, but not body patterning; this is undoubtedly a reflection of the divergence in the former (but not the latter) of the parent species themselves.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10The authors found evidence of greater morphological variation among individuals of mixed ancestry than in individuals of pure ancestry, with a number of hybrids falling outside of the parental range of shape variation.
“Most notably, we found evidence of greater morphological variation among individuals of mixed ancestry than in individuals of pure ancestry, with a number of hybrids falling outside of the parental range of shape variation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Findingreasoning§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The other components combine positive and negative values indicating that they portray aspects of shape.
“The other components combine positive and negative values indicating that they portray aspects of shape.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The hybrids are significantly larger than C. penicillata for nine traits; they are not significantly smaller for any traits.
“The hybrids are significantly larger than C. penicillata for nine traits (TAIL, CLCR, CLCL, FEMURR, FEMURL, EARR, EARL, WLCR, WLCL); they are not significantly smaller for any traits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11While morphometric traits studied in the sample of C. penicillata × C. geoffroyi hybrids were on average intermediate between those of the parental species, with no obvious evidence for heterosis or dysgenesis, the authors did observe individual transgressive hybrids.
“However, while morphometric traits studied in our sample of C. penicillata 9 C. geoffroyi hybrids were on average intermediate between those of the parental species, with no obvious evidence for heterosis or dysgenesis, nonetheless, we did observe individual transgressive hybrids.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11The hybrid group with the intermediate facial pattern C is the only hybrid group that is C. penicillata-sized and shaped, while the facially C. geoffroyi-like hybrids are fully intermediate between the two parental species in size.
“Similarly, the hybrid group with the intermediate facial pattern C is the only hybrid group that is C. penicillata -sized and shaped, while the facially C. geoffroyi -like hybrids are fully intermediate between the two parental species in size.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11Individuals with the most C. penicillata-like facial morphotype (pattern A) were on average more C. geoffroyi-like in body size, but were also highly variable relative to the other hybrid facial groups, with a number of individuals who were strongly transgressive in body shape relative to the purebred species.
“For example, the individuals with the most C. penicillata -like facial morphotype (pattern A) were on average more C. geoffroyi -like in body size, but were also highly variable relative to the other hybrid facial groups, with a number of individuals who were strongly transgressive in body shape relative to the purebred species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Conclusion · p. 12The results presented here have shown that hybrids of C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi differ from parental taxa, as well as from each other, in terms of body size/shape and facial patterning.
“The results presented here have shown that hybrids of C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi differ from parental taxa, as well as from each other, in terms of body size/shape and facial patterning.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown data§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11One pattern apparent in the results is discordance between parental facial and morphometric traits, as well as differences in overall levels of variation, among hybrid phenotypes in the Viçosa zone.
“One intriguing pattern apparent in our results is discordance between parental facial and morphometric traits, as well as differences in overall levels of variation, among hybrid phenotypes in the Vic ¸osa zone.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Premisenone given§ Morphological Variation in Wild Marmosets ( Callithrix penicillata and C. geoffroyi ) and Their Hybrids · p. 1Evolutionary theory and observation predict wider phenotypic variation in hybrids than parental species.
“Evolutionary theory and observation predict wider phenotypic variation in hybrids than parental species.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim.
Premisenone given§ Morphological Variation in Wild Marmosets ( Callithrix penicillata and C. geoffroyi ) and Their Hybrids · p. 1Knowledge about the primate hybrid phenotype remains limited due to a small number of available studies on hybrid primate morphology.
“Primate hybridization is often documented through genetic evidence, but knowledge about the primate hybrid phenotype remains limited due to a small number of available studies on hybrid primate morphology.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ R. R. Ackermann ( & ) · p. 1Mate preference, and therefore gene flow/introgression, may be biased towards C. penicillata within the hybrid zone.
“Hybrid facial morphotypes were biased towards C. penicillata , suggesting that the pelage of this species may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi in this context, and indicating that mate preference, and therefore gene flow/ introgression, may be biased towards C. penicillata within the hybrid zone.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 1Theoretical expectations regarding phenotypic diversity within hybrid populations predict a complex range of phenotypes including cryptic hybrids, intermediate individuals, and transgressive segregation.
“Theoretical expectations regarding phenotypic diversity within hybrid populations predict a complex range of phenotypes that can include individuals that resemble either parental population (cryptic hybrids), those that are morphologically intermediate to parental populations, as well as individuals that display transgressive segregation (Ackermann 2010).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Ackermann 2010 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10Cavalcanti and Langguth (2008) presented behavioral evidence that head coloration in marmosets may also be important in recognition of conspecifics.
“Cavalcanti and Langguth (2008) presented behavioral evidence that head coloration in marmosets may also be important in recognition of conspecifics, but whether facial traits play a role in mate recognition for marmosets is still unclear.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Cavalcanti and Langguth (2008)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10Chemosensory communication is well developed in Callithrix species.
“It is also noteworthy that chemosensory communication is well developed in Callithrix species (Epple et al. 1993), although how chemosensory signals play into conspecific identification has not been well established.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Epple et al. 1993 source
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10Given the high percentage of hybrids possessing a C. penicillata facial morphotype, the C. penicillata facial phenotype may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi.
“Given the high percentage of hybrids possessing a C. penicillata facial morphotype, the C. penicillata facial phenotype may be dominant to that of C. geoffroyi.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9Callithrix species vary in shades of the undercoat in hairs of the back, flanks and outer thighs (between yellow, brown, and red hues).
“Coimbra-Filho et al. (2006) do point out that Callithrix species vary in shades of the undercoat in hairs of the back, flanks and outer thighs (between yellow, brown, and red hues).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Coimbra-Filho et al. (2006) source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Anthropogenic factors are creating new areas of marmoset species sympatry and in turn resulting in recent hybridization events.
“While hybridization does occur at natural contact points between Callithrix species (e.g., Malukiewicz 2013), the above anthropogenic factors are creating new areas of marmoset species sympatry and in turn resulting in recent hybridization events (e.g., Alonso et al. 1987; Ruiz-Miranda et al. 2000, 2006; Affonso et al. 2004; Pereira 2010; personal observation, ISO, JM, and VB).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Alonso et al. 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Ruiz-Miranda et al. 2000 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- cites Affonso et al. 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Transgressive segregation drives the appearance of phenotypic novelty in hybridizing animal populations.
“This type of research supports the hypothesis that transgressive segregation drives the appearance of phenotypic novelty in hybridizing animal populations (Dittrich-Reed and Fitzpatrick 2013), which in turn may fuel new adaptations and hybrid speciation (Seehausen 2004; Rieseberg et al. 2003).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Dittrich-Reed and Fitzpatrick 2013 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9C. kuhlii has an intensely reddish brown undercoat that seems to be dominant to C. geoffroyi, as the C. kuhlii phenotype is often transmitted to C. kuhlii × C. geoffroyi hybrids.
“For example, C. kuhlii has an intensely reddish brown undercoat that seems to be dominant to C. geoffroyi , as the C. kuhlii phenotype is often transmitted to C. kuhlii 9 C. geoffroyi hybrids (Coimbra-Filho et al. 2006).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Coimbra-Filho et al. 2006 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9The hybrid individuals studied here most likely represent highly admixed multigenerational hybrids that may eventually form a hybrid swarm.
“Based on this information, the hybrid individuals studied here most likely represent highly admixed multigenerational hybrids that may eventually form a hybrid swarm.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Transgression occurs in a wide range of hybridizing animal taxa.
“Empirical studies show that transgression occurs in a wide range of hybridizing animal taxa, including sculpins (Czypionka et al. 2012), African cichlids (Parsons et al. 2011), land snails (Chiba 2005), bats (Larsen et al. 2010), salamander (Dittrich-Reed and Fitzpatrick 2013), dolphins (Amaral et al. 2014), and copepods (Pritchard et al. 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedIt may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8C. aurita is thought to be the native marmoset species in this area of Brazil, but it is currently not found in Viçosa, possibly due to anthropogenic disturbance and declines in native marmoset populations.
“While the highly endangered C. aurita is thought to be the native marmoset species in this area of Brazil (Rylands et al. 1993, 2009), the species is currently not found in Vic ¸osa, possibly due to high levels of anthropogenic disturbance within the Atlantic Forest biome and resultant declines in native marmoset populations (Rylands et al. 1993, 2009).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rylands et al. 1993, 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 7The variation seen in the hybrids does not overlap with that of the parental species (i.e. they are transgressive), and the overall magnitude of variation seen in the hybrids exceeds that of the parental taxa.
“However, these results also indicate that for the most part the variation seen in the hybrids does not overlap with that of the parental species (i.e. they are transgressive), and that the overall magnitude of variation seen in the hybrids exceeds that of the parental taxa.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2The ranges of Callithrix species are largely allopatric, with some species contact occurring at species distribution borders, but historical species ranges are being altered due to habitat destruction and anthropogenic introductions.
“The ranges of Callithrix species are largely allopatric, with some species contact occurring at species distribution borders, but historical species ranges are being altered due to habitat destruction and anthropogenic introductions of marmoset species outside of their historical geographical bounds (Rylands et al. 1993, 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Transgressive segregation is common in hybridizing plants but less common in animals.
“Transgressive segregation is common (even ubiquitous) in hybridizing plants, but less common in animals; nonetheless, work by Rieseberg et al. (1999) indicated that 78 % (45/58) of examined animal studies report transgressive segregation, while approximately one-third of the traits examined (200/650 animal traits) are transgressive.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rieseberg et al. 1999 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisenone given§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Dysgenesis is predicted in the hybrids between taxa that are more distantly related and adaptively distinct.
“Dysgenesis is predicted in the hybrids between taxa that are more distantly related and adaptively distinct.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Study design and conductown data§ Marmoset Sampling Locations · p. 4There was a 95% level of concordance between inter-observer pelage color and pattern classifications.
“There was a 95 % level of concordance between inter-observer pelage color and pattern classifications, and in cases of observer disagreement individuals were rechecked and an inter-observer agreement was reached.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Pelage Measurements and Analysis · p. 3The throat of C. geoffroyi is white, the upper surfaces of the hands and feet are black or dark brown, and back coloration is similar to that of C. penicillata.
“The throat of C. geoffroyi is also white, the upper surfaces of the hands and feet are black or dark brown, and back coloration is similar to that of C. penicillata (Hershkovitz 1977).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hershkovitz 1977
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Pelage Measurements and Analysis · p. 3Both C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi possess a striated tail.
“Both C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi possess a striated tail (Hershkovitz 1977; Vivo 1991).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Hershkovitz 1977
- cites Vivo 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Premisenone given§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8Current marmoset populations within Viçosa are descended from nonnative species introduced into the area during the 1970s as pets.
“Instead, current marmoset populations within Vic ¸osa are descended from nonnative species introduced into the area during 1970s as pets (IOS, personal observation).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Study design and conductown data§ Marmoset Sampling Locations · p. 4In cases of observer disagreement, individuals were rechecked and an inter-observer agreement was reached.
“There was a 95 % level of concordance between inter-observer pelage color and pattern classifications, and in cases of observer disagreement individuals were rechecked and an inter-observer agreement was reached.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Hershkovitz originally described facial characteristics of C. penicillata × Callithrix spp. hybrids from a limited number of museum specimens, and other studies have provided similar descriptions for wild hybrid samples.
“Hershkovitz (1975, 1977) originally described facial characteristics of C. penicillata 9 Callithrix spp. hybrids from a limited number of museum specimens, and other studies have provided similar descriptions for wild hybrid samples (Passamani et al. 1997; Mendes 1997a, b; RuizMiranda et al. 2006; Malukiewicz 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedIt may state two separate claims as one.
Premiseown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9One of the authors identified C. penicillata groups as close as 39 and 24 km to the Viçosa hybrid zone, and Viçosa is located on the cusp of the geographical range of this species.
“However, one of us (IOS) has identified C. penicillata groups as close as 39 and 24 km to the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone, and Vic ¸osa itself is located on the cusp of the geographical range of this species, making the flow of C. penicillata genes into the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone a remote possibility.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 7Results of the PCA support what was seen in the quantitative tests, and suggest that on average the hybrids occupy an intermediate shape space between the two parent species.
“Considering taxon differences first (Fig. 5a-c), results of the PCA support what was seen in the quantitative tests, and suggest that on average the hybrids occupy an intermediate shape space between the two parent species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2In primates, hybridization is fairly common, estimated to occur among 7-10% of primate species.
“In primates, hybridization is fairly common, estimated to occur among 7-10 % of primate species (Corte ´s-Ortiz et al. 2007).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Cortés-Ortiz et al. 2007 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 1The increased phenotypic variation in hybrids is a predictable result of allelic differences between parental taxa, as well as genome-wide dominance and epistatic effects.
“Although the underlying genetic architecture responsible for this increased phenotypic variation is incompletely understood, it is a predictable result of allelic differences between parental taxa, as well as genome-wide dominance and epistatic effects (see discussion in Ackermann 2010).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Ackermann 2010 source
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 9Similarities between hybrid and parental individuals in these pelage traits suggest that underlying genetic differences between parental species are minor for these traits, and there is no expectation for hybrids to be highly variable.
“Such similarities between hybrid and parental individuals suggest that underlining genetic differences between parental species are minor for these pelage traits; as a result there is no expectation for hybrids to be highly variable.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10The tendency for Viçosa hybrids to display C. penicillata-like facial patterns suggests that within this population individuals with such features may be preferred as mates to individuals possessing a C. geoffroyi-like facial phenotype, resulting in uni-directional (or directionally biased) gene flow favoring backcrossing into C. penicillata-like animals.
“However, the tendency for Vic ¸osa hybrids to display C. penicillata -like facial patterns suggests that within this population individuals with such features may be preferred as mates to individuals possessing a C. geoffroyi -like facial phenotype, resulting in uni-directional (or directionally biased) gene flow favoring backcrossing into C. penicillata -like animals.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 278% (45/58) of examined animal studies report transgressive segregation.
“Transgressive segregation is common (even ubiquitous) in hybridizing plants, but less common in animals; nonetheless, work by Rieseberg et al. (1999) indicated that 78 % (45/58) of examined animal studies report transgressive segregation, while approximately one-third of the traits examined (200/650 animal traits) are transgressive.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rieseberg et al. 1999 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ Pelage Variation · p. 6Pattern A is more like C. penicillata individuals, whereas patterns D and E are more like C. geoffroyi individuals.
“Pattern A is more like C. penicillata individuals, whereas patterns D and E are more like C. geoffroyi individuals.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premiseown data§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8The Viçosa marmoset hybrid zone is found on a former sugar and coffee plantation that was abandoned 90 years ago and reestablished as secondary growth forest.
“The hybrid zone is found on a former sugar and coffee plantation that was abandoned 90 years ago and that reestablished itself as a secondary growth forest (IOS, personal observation).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Origin of the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 8The ranges of the parental species C. jacchus and C. geoffroyi are located beyond the limits of Viçosa and are therefore geographically isolated from the Viçosa hybrid zone.
“This is true at least in the case of descendants of C. jacchus and C. geoffroyi; ranges of the parental species are located beyond the limits of Vic ¸osa (Rylands et al. 1993, 2009), and are therefore geographically isolated from the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rylands et al. 1993, 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ PCA Plots: Species Affiliation Only · p. 10The auricular ornaments, patterns, and colorations that characterize marmoset facial morphotypes are among the most complex facial patterns of New World primates, and may serve an adaptive function of intraspecific communication.
“The auricular ornaments, patterns, and colorations that characterize marmoset facial morphotypes are among the most complex facial patterns of New World primates, and may serve an adaptive function of intraspecific communication (Santana et al. 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Santana et al. 2012 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Introduction · p. 2Approximately one-third of the traits examined (200/650 animal traits) are transgressive.
“Transgressive segregation is common (even ubiquitous) in hybridizing plants, but less common in animals; nonetheless, work by Rieseberg et al. (1999) indicated that 78 % (45/58) of examined animal studies report transgressive segregation, while approximately one-third of the traits examined (200/650 animal traits) are transgressive.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rieseberg et al. 1999 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisenone given§ Introduction · p. 2The empirical findings of studies of morphological signatures of primate hybridization agree with theoretical expectations for hybrid phenotypic diversity at both the individual and population levels.
“In general, the empirical findings of these studies agree with theoretical expectations for hybrid phenotypic diversity at both the individual and population levels.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Pelage Measurements and Analysis · p. 3C. geoffroyi has fuller black ear-tufts than C. penicillata, and a fully white facial mask.
“C. geoffroyi has fuller black ear-tufts than C. penicillata , and is also striking in its facial phenotype through possession of a fully white facial mask (Hershkovitz 1977).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hershkovitz 1977
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisereasoning§ Introduction · p. 2Phenotypic variation within wild hybrid marmoset populations beyond previous descriptions remains to be assessed.
“However, phenotypic variation within wild hybrid marmoset populations beyond these descriptions remains to be assessed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Study design and conductown data§ Marmoset Sampling Locations · p. 4Traits were left uncorrected, and no confounding effects from sexual dimorphism are expected.
“Therefore traits were left uncorrected, and we do not expect there to be any confounding effects from sexual dimorphism.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ Morphometric Traits · p. 6The hybrids are, on average, intermediate to the two parental taxa, and are similar to both in body length, but they are not strictly intermediate.
“These results indicate that while the hybrids are, on average, intermediate to the two parental taxa, and are similar to both in body length, they are not strictly intermediate.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Taxa whose crosses display dysgenesis, or hybrid dysfunction, are thought to possess distinct coadapted gene complexes that break down during hybridization.
“Taxa whose crosses display dysgenesis, or hybrid dysfunction, are thought to possess distinct coadapted gene complexes that break down during hybridization (Falconer 1981; Templeton 1987).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Falconer 1981
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Templeton 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Conclusion · p. 12One of the pitfalls of using only morphological data in the identification of hybrids is the lack of information on hybrid status (i.e. F1 vs backcross), and inability to identify cryptic hybrids-individuals that phenotypically resemble parent taxa but are of mixed ancestry.
“One of the pitfalls of using only morphological data in the identification of hybrids is the lack of information on hybrid status (i.e. F1 vs backcross), and inability to identify cryptic hybrids-individuals that phenotypically resemble parent taxa but are of mixed ancestry.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Conclusion · p. 12Management of hybrid populations is a controversial topic, and anthropogenic activities will likely continue to increase incidence and prevalence of animal hybridization.
“Management of hybrid populations is a controversial topic (Allendorf et al. 2001; Detwiler et al. 2005), and anthropogenic activities will likely continue to increase incidence and prevalence of animal hybridization.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Heterosis, or hybrid vigor, is observed in genetically isolated taxa with differences in gene frequencies or dominance deviations and is maximal when different alleles are fixed between taxa.
“Heterosis, or hybrid vigor, is observed in genetically isolated taxa with differences in gene frequencies or dominance deviations and is maximal when different alleles are fixed between taxa (Kohn et al. 2001).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Kohn et al. 2001 source
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisereasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Heterosis may become diluted in multigenerational hybrids where genetic contributions from each parental species may become biased due to the effects of genetic drift, selection, and environment.
“Thus, heterosis may become diluted in multigenerational hybrids where genetic contributions from each parental species may be become biased due to the effects of genetic drift, selection, and environment.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11As the occurrence of heterosis or dysgenesis implies a certain level of genetic distinctness of parental taxa, it is not surprising we did not observe either in our sample given the young age of the Callithrix genus as a whole.
“As the occurrence of heterosis or dysgenesis implies a certain level of genetic distinctness of parental taxa, it is not surprising we did not observe either in our sample given the young age of the Callithrix genus as a whole.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11The production of new forms, or new combinations of traits, is one important result of hybridization.
“The production of new forms, or new combinations of traits, is one important result of hybridization (Arnold 2006, 2008).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Arnold 2006, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11C. penicillata and C. jacchus showed overlapping allele size frequencies and no diagnostic loci between the two species in a panel of 42 nuclear microsatellite loci.
“For example, C. penicillata diverged from its species C. jacchus less than a million years ago (Perelman et al. 2011), and these two species showed overlapping allele size frequencies and no diagnostic loci between the two species (loci with non-overlapping alleles between the two species) in a panel of 42 nuclear microsatellite loci (Malukiewicz 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Malukiewicz 2013
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationcitation§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11The young age of Callithrix species probably has not yet allowed for the evolution of either distinct coadapted gene complexes or significant differences in allele frequencies between these species.
“Based on nuclear data, Callithrix separated from its sister clade of Mico and Cebuella 2.5 million years ago (Perelman et al. 2011), and the young age of Callithrix species probably has not yet allowed for the evolution of either distinct coadapted gene complexes or significant differences in allele frequencies between these species.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisecitation§ Conclusion · p. 12Such discordance is also widely observed throughout baboon hybrid zones.
“Such discordance is also widely observed throughout baboon hybrid zones (Zinner et al. 2009).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Zinner et al. 2009 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Premisereasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Heterosis is expected to be strongest in early generation hybrids that are genetically intermediate between parental populations (i.e. F1s), due to restoration of heterozygosity after mating of differentiated lineages.
“Heterosis is expected to be strongest in early generation hybrids that are genetically intermediate between parental populations (i.e. F1s), due to restoration of heterozygosity after mating of differentiated lineages.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown data§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10These results suggest similar allele frequencies or dominance deviations between the parental taxa.
“These results suggest similar allele frequencies or dominance deviations between the parental taxa.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Premisecitation§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11These cichlid and mouse data show that release from evolutionary constraints of phenotypic traits can occur in the F2 generation and then continue in later hybrid generations.
“These cichlid and mouse data show that release from evolutionary constraints of phenotypic traits can occur in the F2 generation and then continue in later hybrid generations.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checkedIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 10Dysgenesis is not present in the hybrid marmoset sample, and therefore the gene complexes of the parental species are similar.
“Here, hybrid trait averages were not smaller than both parental trait averages, suggesting that dysgenesis is not present in our hybrid marmoset sample, and therefore that the gene complexes of the parental species are similar.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationreasoning§ Discordance in Facial and Morphometric Features Among Vic ¸osa Hybrid Marmosets · p. 11If non-native marmosets were originally introduced to this area in the 1970s, and assuming approximately 1.5 years per marmoset generation, marmosets currently living in the area are members of approximately the 25th-30th generation of marmoset hybrids within Viçosa.
“If non-native marmosets were originally introduced to this area in the 1970s, and assuming approximately 1.5 years per marmoset generation (Tardif et al. 2003), we would expect that marmosets currently living in the area are members of approximately the 25th-30th generation of marmoset hybrids within Vic ¸osa.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Tardif et al. 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11This is a manifestation of the general increase in variation seen in the hybrids, and suggests that within the Viçosa hybrid zone morphometric variation for the studied traits can best be explained by the complementary allele model proposed by Rieseberg et al. (1999, 2003).
“This is a manifestation of the general increase in variation seen in the hybrids, and suggests that within the Vic ¸osa hybrid zone morphometric variation for the studied traits can best be explained by the complementary allele model proposed by Rieseberg et al. (1999, 2003).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Rieseberg et al. (1999, 2003)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ Morphometric Variation Within the Vic ¸osa Hybrid Zone · p. 11Morphometric traits in parental species are likely to be influenced by additive alleles of opposing effects, with non-opposing alleles recombining in the transgressive hybrids.
“In other words, morphometric traits in parental species are likely to be influenced by additive alleles of opposing effects, with non-opposing alleles recombining in the transgressive hybrids.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The sampled C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi individuals are pure representatives of their species, not hybrids.
“pure wild populations of C. penicillata and C. geoffroyi”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Stated total sample does not match the species counts
MinorThe listed species counts add to 76 individuals, not the stated total of 65. The total of 65 matches the adult morphometric sample in Table 2, but not the sample described here.
Reported 65 · recomputed 76
“Our total sample consists of 65 individuals of C. penicillata ( n = 22), C. geoffroyi ( n = 14), and their hybrids ( n = 40).”
Mean juvenile-female count in Table 1 is incorrect
MinorThe five juvenile-female counts average 1.40 per group, not 4.80.
Reported 4.8 · recomputed 1.4
“| Mean | 3.80 | 3.80 | 3.80 | 4.80 | 4.80 | 4.80 | 8.60 |”
Citations
Cites
Introduction to Quantitative Genetics.
Edwards, A. W. F., & Falconer, D. S. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529912 · Cited by 21,447
Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. B
Press, H. (1886) · Cited by 10,087
Ribeiro, M. C., Metzger, J. P., Martensen, A. C., Ponzoni, F. J., & Hirota, M. M. (2009) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.02.021 · Cited by 4,282
Introduction to quantitative genetics
Falconer, D. S. (1960) · Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR) · Cited by 3,205
Hybridization and adaptive radiation
Seehausen, O. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.01.003 · Cited by 1,627
The problems with hybrids: setting conservation guidelines
Allendorf, F. W., Leary, R. F., Spruell, P., & Wenburg, J. K. (2001) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02290-x · Cited by 1,533
A molecular phylogeny of living primates
Perelman, P., Johnson, W. E., Roos, C., Seuánez, H. N., Horvath, J. E., Moreira, M. A. M., Kessing, B., Pontius, J., Roelke, M., Rumpler, Y., et al. (2011) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001342 · Cited by 1,414 · cited 4×
“For example, C. penicillata diverged from its species C. jacchus less than a million years ago (Perelman et al. 2011), and these two species showed overlapping allele size frequencies and no diagnostic loci between the two species (loci with non-overlapping alleles between the two species) in a…”
BackgroundInfluentialTransgressive segregation, adaptation and speciation
Rieseberg, L. H., Archer, M. A., & Wayne, R. K. (1999) · Heredity · doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6886170 · Cited by 820
Cords, M. (2007) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/s10764-007-9131-y · Cited by 608
Evolution through Genetic Exchange
Arnold, M. L. (2007) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199229031.001.0001 · Cited by 474
Marsden, P. D. (1985) · Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · doi:10.1590/s0037-86821985000300013 · Cited by 472
A genomic view of introgression and hybrid speciation
Baack, E. J., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2007) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/j.gde.2007.09.001 · Cited by 438
Marmosets and tamarins: systematics, behaviour, and ecology
(1994) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.31-4916 · Cited by 293
Rieseberg, L. H., Widmer, A., Arntz, A. M., & Burke, B. (2003) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2003.1283 · Cited by 249
A Comparison of Anubis Baboons, Hamadryas Baboons and Their Hybrids at a Species Border in Ethiopia
Nagel, U. (1973) · Folia Primatologica · doi:10.1159/000155536 · Cited by 231
Evolution and ecology of macaque societies
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-3858 · Cited by 229
Mitochondrial phylogeography of baboons (Papiospp.) – Indication for introgressive hybridization?
Zinner, D., Groeneveld, L. F., Keller, C., & Roos, C. (2009) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-83 · Cited by 177
Natural hybridization generates mammalian lineage with species characteristics
Larsen, P. A., Marchán-Rivadeneira, M. R., & Baker, R. J. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1000133107 · Cited by 161
Transgressive Hybrids as Hopeful Monsters
Dittrich-Reed, D. R., & Fitzpatrick, B. M. (2013) · Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1007/s11692-012-9209-0 · Cited by 148
Hybridization, transgressive segregation, genetic covariation, and adaptive radiation
Bell, M. A., & Travis, M. P. (2005) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.021 · Cited by 131
Identifying the morphological signatures of hybridization in primate and human evolution
Ackermann, R. R., Rogers, J., & Cheverud, J. M. (2006) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.07.009 · Cited by 115
Self-citationAdaptive evolution of facial colour patterns in Neotropical primates
Santana, S. E., Lynch Alfaro, J., & Alfaro, M. E. (2012) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.2326 · Cited by 104
The Smallest anthropoids: the marmoset/Callimico radiation
(2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-5654 · Cited by 97
METACHROMISM OR THE PRINCIPLE OF EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE IN MAMMALIAN TEGUMENTARY COLORS
Hershkovitz, P. (1968) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1968.tb03992.x · Cited by 91
Conservation Implications of Hybridization in African Cercopithecine Monkeys
Detwiler, K. M., Burrell, A. S., & Jolly, C. J. (2005) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/s10764-005-4372-0 · Cited by 90
Hybridization in Large-Bodied New World Primates
Cortés-Ortiz, L., Duda, T. F., Canales-Espinosa, D., García-Orduña, F., Rodríguez-Luna, E., & Bermingham, E. (2007) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.107.074278 · Cited by 90
Bonhomme, M., Cuartero, S., Blancher, A., & Crouau‐Roy, B. (2008) · Journal of Heredity · doi:10.1093/jhered/esn093 · Cited by 84
Phenotypic traits of primate hybrids: Recognizing admixture in the fossil record
Ackermann, R. R. (2010) · Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews · doi:10.1002/evan.20288 · Cited by 81
Self-citationMORPHOLOGICAL AND MOLECULAR EVIDENCE REVEALS RECENT HYBRIDIZATION BETWEEN GORILLA TAXA
Ackermann, R., & Bishop, J. M. (2009) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00858.x · Cited by 74
Self-citationRylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F., & Mittermeier, R. A. (2009) · The Smallest Anthropoids · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0293-1_2 · Cited by 74
Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, & Mittermeier, R. A. (1993) · Marmosets and Tamarins · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198540229.003.0002 · Cited by 69
Parsons, K. J., Son, Y. H., & Craig Albertson, R. (2011) · Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1007/s11692-011-9126-7 · Cited by 67
Marmoset phylogenetics, conservation perspectives, and evolution of the mtDNA control region
Tagliaro, C. H., Schneider, M. P., Schneider, H., Sampaio, I. C., & Stanhope, M. J. (1997) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025807 · Cited by 67
Ruiz-Miranda, C. R., Affonso, A. G., de Morais, M. M., Verona, C. E., Martins, A., & Beck, B. (2006) · Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology · doi:10.1590/s1516-89132006000100012 · Cited by 65
Sexual dimorphism in two subspecies of Ethiopian baboons (Papio hamadryas) and their hybrids
Phillips‐Conroy, J. E., & Jolly, C. J. (1981) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330560203 · Cited by 64
Hybrid Speciation in a Marine Mammal: The Clymene Dolphin (Stenella clymene)
Amaral, A. R., Lovewell, G., Coelho, M. M., Amato, G., & Rosenbaum, H. C. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083645 · Cited by 63
Reticulate Evolution and Humans
Arnold, M. L. (2008) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199539581.001.0001 · Cited by 61
From dependence to sexual maturity: the behavioural ontogeny of Callitrichidae
Yamamoto, M. E. (1993) · Marmosets and Tamarins · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198540229.003.0011 · Cited by 61
Immigration of aPapio anubis male into a group ofPapio cynocephalus baboons and
Samuels, A., & Jeanne Altmann, A. (1986) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/bf02692314 · Cited by 57
Nagorsen, D. W., & Peterson, R. L. (1980) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004628311 · Cited by 53
Modularity as a source of new morphological variation in the mandible of hybrid mice
Renaud, S., Alibert, P., & Auffray, J.-C. (2012) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-12-141 · Cited by 51
Epple, G., Belcher, A. M., Kilderling, I., Zeller, U., Scolnick, L., Greenfield, & Smith III, A. B. (1993) · Marmosets and Tamarins · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198540229.003.0005 · Cited by 48
Bicca‐Marques, J. C., Prates, H. M., de Aguiar, F. R. C., & Jones, C. B. (2008) · Primates · doi:10.1007/s10329-008-0091-4 · Cited by 42
Cheverud, J. M., Jacobs, S. C., & Moore, A. J. (1993) · American Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1002/ajp.1350310104 · Cited by 40
Metachromism or the Principle of Evolutionary Change in Mammalian Tegumentary Colors
Hershkovitz, P. (1968) · Evolution · doi:10.2307/2406880 · Cited by 40
Kelaita, M. A., & Cortés‐Ortiz, L. (2013) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.22196 · Cited by 37
Ruiz-Miranda, C. R., Affonso, A. G., Martins, A., & Beck, B. (2000) · Neotropical Primates · doi:10.62015/np.2000.v8.455 · Cited by 31
Pritchard, V. L., Knutson, V. L., Lee, M., Zieba, J. T., & Edmands, S. (2012) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1111/jeb.12060 · Cited by 25
Kohn, L. A. P., Langton, L. B., & Cheverud, J. M. (2001) · American Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1002/ajp.1011 · Cited by 24
Comments on the Taxonomy of Brazilian Marmosets (Callithrix, Callitrichidae)
Hershkovitz, P. (1975) · Folia Primatologica · doi:10.1159/000155687 · Cited by 23
APPEARANCE OF MORPHOLOGICAL NOVELTY IN A HYBRID ZONE BETWEEN TWO SPECIES OF LAND SNAIL
Chiba, S. (2005) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01820.x · Cited by 23
Transcriptome changes after genome‐wide admixture in invasive sculpins (Cottus)
CZYPIONKA, T., CHENG, J., POZHITKOV, A., & NOLTE, A. W. (2012) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2012.05645.x · Cited by 20
Hybridization in free-ranging Callithrix flaviceps and the taxonomy of the Atlantic forest marmosets
Mendes, S. L. (1997) · Neotropical Primates · doi:10.62015/np.1997.v5.367 · Cited by 17
Hybridization between Callithrix geoffroyi and C. penicillata in southeastern Minas Gerais, Brazil
Passamani, M., Aguiar, L. M. S., Machado, R. B., & Figueiredo, E. (1997) · Neotropical Primates · doi:10.62015/np.1997.v5.369 · Cited by 15
Coimbra-Filho, A. F., Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Mendes, S. L., Kierulff, M. C. M., & de S. Pinto, L. P. (2006) · Primate Conservation · doi:10.1896/0898-6207.21.1.1 · Cited by 13
Hazards in Choosing Between Pooled and Separate- Variances t Tests
Zumbo, B. D., & Zimmerman, D. W. (2009) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 12
Pereira, D. G. (2010) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · Cited by 2
(2003) · PubMed
Leonard, W. (1997) · doi:10.1002/(sici)1096-8644(199708)103:4
(2013)
Self-citation(1977)
Origin of new evolutionary lineages
Arnold, M. L. (2007) · Evolution through Genetic Exchange · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199229031.003.0007
APPEARANCE OF MORPHOLOGICAL NOVELTY IN A HYBRID ZONE BETWEEN TWO SPECIES OF LAND SNAIL
Chiba, S. (2005) · Evolution · doi:10.1554/04-521.1
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Alonso, C., de Faria, D. S., Langguth, A., & Santee, D. F. (1987). Variação da pelagem na área de intergradação entre Callithrix jacchus e Callithrix penicillata. Revista Brasileira de Biologia, 47, 465–470.
- Cavalcanti, G. C., & Langguth, A. (2008). Recognition of mate and speciation in marmoset genus Callithrix (Primates, Cebidae, Callithriquinae). Revista Nordestina de Biologia, 19, 59–73.
- Falconer, D. S. (1981). Introduction of quantitative genetics. London: Longman Press.
- Rylands, A. B., Spironelo, W. R., Tornisielo, V. L., de Sá, R. L., Kierulff, M. C. M., & Santos, I. B. (1988). Primates of the Rio Jequitinhonha valley, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Primate Conservation, 9, 100–109.
- Templeton, A. R. (1987). Inferences on natural population structure from genetic studies of captive mammalian populations. In B. D. Chepko-Sade & Z. T. Halpin (Eds.), Mammalian dispersal patterns (pp. 257–272). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Vivo, M. (1991). Taxonomia de Callithrix Erxleben, 1777 (Callitrichidae, Primates). Belo Horizonte: Fundação Biodiversitas.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hybridization in human evolution: Insights from other organisms
Ackermann, R., Arnold, M. L., Baiz, M. D., Cahill, J. A., Cortés‐Ortiz, L., Evans, B. J., Grant, B. R., Grant, P. R., Hallgrímsson, B., Humphreys, R. A., et al. (2019) · Evolutionary Anthropology Issues News and Reviews · doi:10.1002/evan.21787 · Cited by 101
Self-citationThe mammalian faunas endemic to the Cerrado and the Caatinga
Gutiérrez, E. E., & Marinho‐Filho, J. (2017) · ZooKeys · doi:10.3897/zookeys.644.10827 · Cited by 101
An Introduction to the Callithrix Genus and Overview of Recent Advances in Marmoset Research
Malukiewicz, J., Boere, V., de Oliveira, M. A. B., D’arc, M., Ferreira, J. V. A., French, J. A., Housman, G., Igayara, C. S., Jerusalinsky, L., de Melo, F. R., et al. (2020) · ILAR Journal · doi:10.1093/ilar/ilab027 · Cited by 55
Self-citationA Review of Experimental, Natural, and Anthropogenic Hybridization in Callithrix Marmosets
Malukiewicz, J. (2018) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/s10764-018-0068-0 · Cited by 53
Self-citationThe contribution of admixture to primate evolution
Tung, J., & Barreiro, L. B. (2017) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/j.gde.2017.08.010 · Cited by 52
The gut microbiome of exudivorous marmosets in the wild and captivity
Malukiewicz, J., Cartwright, R. A., Dergam, J. A., Igayara, C. S., Kessler, S. E., Moreira, S. B., Nash, L. T., Nicola, P. A., Pereira, L. C. M., Pissinatti, A., et al. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-08797-7 · Cited by 44
Self-citationIto, T., Kawamoto, Y., Hamada, Y., & Nishimura, T. (2015) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/bij.12528 · Cited by 33
Detwiler, K. M. (2018) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/s10764-018-0029-7 · Cited by 29
Detogne, N., Ferreguetti, Á. C., Mello, J. H. F., Santana, M. C., Dias, A. D. C., da Mota, N. C. J., Gonçalves, A. E. D. C., de Souza, C. P., & Bergallo, H. G. (2017) · American Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1002/ajp.22718 · Cited by 24
Warren, K. A., Ritzman, T. B., Humphreys, R. A., Percival, C. J., Hallgrímsson, B., & Ackermann, R. (2018) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2017.12.002 · Cited by 24
Self-citationMoraes, A. M., Vancine, M. H., Moraes, A. M., Cordeiro, C. L. D. O., Pinto, M. P., Lima, A. A., Culot, L., Silva, T. S. F., Collevatti, R. G., Ribeiro, M. C., et al. (2019) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00706 · Cited by 23
Malukiewicz, J., Cartwright, R. A., Dergam, J. A., Igayara, C. S., Nicola, P. A., Pereira, L. M., Ruiz-Miranda, C. R., Stone, A. C., Silva, D. L., da Silva, F. D. F. R., et al. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96404-6 · Cited by 23
Self-citationVariation in the nasal cavity of baboon hybrids with implications for late Pleistocene hominins
Eichel, K., & Ackermann, R. (2016) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2016.02.007 · Cited by 18
Self-citationEffects of hybridization on pelvic morphology: A macaque model
Buck, L. T., Katz, D. C., Ackermann, R., Hlusko, L. J., Kanthaswamy, S., & Weaver, T. D. (2021) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2021.103049 · Cited by 17
Self-citationKim, J., Edge, M. D., Goldberg, A., & Rosenberg, N. A. (2021) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.24261 · Cited by 16
Boel, C. A., Curnoe, D., & Hamada, Y. (2019) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1007/s10764-019-00081-2 · Cited by 14
Mitogenomic phylogeny of Callithrix with special focus on human transferred taxa
Malukiewicz, J., Cartwright, R. A., Curi, N. H. A., Dergam, J. A., Igayara, C. S., Moreira, S. B., Molina, C. V., Nicola, P. A., Noll, A., Passamani, M., et al. (2021) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-021-07533-1 · Cited by 14
Self-citationCezar, A. M., Pessôa, L. M., & Bonvicino, C. R. (2017) · Zoologia (Curitiba) · doi:10.3897/zoologia.34.e14881 · Cited by 13
Morphological and Genetic Variation Among Callithrix Hybrids in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Cezar, A. M., Lopes, G. S., Cardim, S. D. S., Bueno, C., Weksler, M., & de Oliveira, J. A. (2023) · Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1007/s11692-023-09610-7 · Cited by 12
Vital, O., Massardi, N. T., Silvério, S. L. B., Corrêa, T. C. V., Gjorup, D. F., Jerusalinsky, L., & de Melo, F. R. (2020) · Neotropical Primates · doi:10.62015/np.2020.v26.59 · Cited by 9
Malukiewicz, J., Guschanski, K., Grativol, A. D., de Oliveira, M. A. B., Ruiz-Miranda, C. R., & Stone, A. C. (2016) · American Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1002/ajp.22587 · Cited by 7
Self-citationPelage variation and morphometrics of closely related Callithrix marmoset species and their hybrids
Malukiewicz, J., Warren, K. A., Boere, V., Bandeira, I. L. C., Curi, N. H. A., das Dores, F. T., Fitorra, L. S., Furuya, H. R., Igayara, C. S., Milanelo, L., et al. (2024) · BMC Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1186/s12862-024-02305-3 · Cited by 6
Self-citationGuimarães‐Lopes, V. D. P., Gomes, M. R. V. S., Kagueyama, M., Faria, R. D. C. V., Filho, O. P. R., de Melo, F. R., & Sartori, S. S. R. (2020) · Anatomia Histologia Embryologia · doi:10.1111/ahe.12555 · Cited by 6
Zdjelar, N., Nagendran, L., Kendall, C., Ackermann, R., & Schroeder, L. (2021) · Journal of Morphology · doi:10.1002/jmor.21417 · Cited by 6
Self-citationGestich, C. C., de Souza, G. C., Rosa, C., Passamani, M., Hasui, É., & da Cunha, R. G. T. (2023) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-023-02668-x · Cited by 6
Hybridization and Hybrid Zones
Cortés‐Ortiz, L. (2017) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119179313.wbprim0380 · Cited by 6
An Introduction to the Callithrix Genus and Overview of Recent Advances in Marmoset ResearchPreprint
Malukiewicz, J., Boere, V., de Oliveira, M. A. B., D’arc, M., Ferreira, J. V. A., French, J., Houman, G., de Souza, C. A. I., Jerusalinsky, L., de Melo, F. R., et al. (2021) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202011.0256.v2 · Cited by 6
Self-citationA Macaque Model for the Effects of Hybridization on Body Size
Buck, L. T., Katz, D. C., Ackermann, R., Hlusko, L. J., Kanthaswamy, S., & Weaver, T. D. (2025) · American Journal of Biological Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.25062 · Cited by 5
Self-citationHybridization in human evolution: insights from other organismsPreprint
Ackermann, R., Arnold, M., Baiz, M. D., Cahill, J. A., Cortés‐Ortiz, L., Evans, B. J., Grant, B. R., Grant, P. R., Hallgrímsson, B., Humphreys, R. A., et al. (2018) · AfricArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31730/osf.io/y3bp7 · Cited by 5
Self-citationHybridization and its impact on the ontogenetic allometry of skulls in macaques
Ito, T., Kimura, R., Wakamori, H., Tanaka, M., Tezuka, A., Nagano, A. J., Hamada, Y., & Kawamoto, Y. (2023) · Evolution · doi:10.1093/evolut/qpad206 · Cited by 2
Braz, A. G., Rosa, D. T. C., Vale, M. M., & Costa, L. P. (2016) · Oecologia Australis · doi:10.4257/oeco.2016.2001.11 · Cited by 2
Global climate changes and the evolution of area suitability for marmosets of genus Callithrix
Amaral, C. R. L., de Freitas, A. C., Barbosa, R. G., Donato, A. L. D. S., Aximoff, I., de Moura, V. C., & dos Anjos, D. A. A. (2023) · Academia Biology · doi:10.20935/acadbiol6100 · Cited by 2
de Melo, F. R., Vital, O., Pacheco, F. S., & de Carvalho, R. S. (2024) · CABI Compendium · doi:10.1079/cabicompendium.79394345 · Cited by 2
Surrounded by invaders: marmoset conservation challenges in Brazilian Atlantic Forest fragments
Guimarães‐Lopes, V. D. P., Loureiro, N. G., Damo, J. S., de Melo, F. R., Rodrigues, F. H. G., & Massara, R. L. (2025) · Discover Conservation · doi:10.1007/s44353-025-00024-4 · Cited by 1
Guimarães‐Lopes, V. D. P., Loureiro, N. G., Damo, J. S., Melo, F. R., Rodrigues, F. H. G., & Massara, R. L. (2025) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s0030605325000328 · Cited by 1
Pérez-Estrada, A. M., & Soto‐Calderón, I. D. (2026) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyag038 · Cited by 1
Francisco, T. M., Couto, D. R., Silva, I. D. O. E., Pacheco, C. M., & Boere, V. (2016) · Enciclopédia Biosfera · doi:10.18677/encibio_2016b_105 · Cited by 1
Self-citationLopes, L. F. L., Gris, V. N., Ferraro, M. A., & Cortopassi, S. (2022) · Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science · doi:10.11606/issn.1678-4456.bjvras.2022.188652 · Cited by 1
Kozitzky, E. A. (2021) · Dental Anthropology Journal · doi:10.26575/daj.v34i1.316 · Cited by 1
Milagres, A. P. (2015) · Americanae (AECID Library) · Cited by 1
Malukiewicz, J., Boere, V., Curi, N. H. A., Dergam, J. A., de Souza, C. I., Moreira, S. B., Nicola, P. A., Passamani, M., Pereira, L. C., del Rosario, R. C. H., et al. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.05.19.654637 · Cited by 1
Self-citationPacheco, F. S., Vital, O., de Carvalho, R. S., & de Melo, F. R. (2022) · CABI Compendium · doi:10.1079/cabicompendium.91183
Home Range and Group Composition of Wild Hybrid Marmosets in an Urban Forest Fragment
Weysfield, F. Q., Boere, V., Milagres, A. P., & Silva, I. D. O. E. (2022) · Ensaios e Ciência C Biológicas Agrárias e da Saúde · doi:10.17921/1415-6938.2022v26n3p283-286
Self-citationSilvério, S. L. B., Vital, O., Massara, R. L., Pacheco, F. S., Sarcinelli, R. D. C., & de Melo, F. R. (2025) · Primates · doi:10.1007/s10329-025-01214-3
Manejo experimental de saguis invasores: captura, esterilização, pós-operatório e soltura
Ávila, L. V., Voorwald, F. A., Oliveira, A. S. G. E., de Oliveira, M. R. M., Massardi, N. T., Favarato, L. S. C., Mascarenhas, I. N., de Melo, F. C. S. A., de Melo, F. R., & Jerusalinsky, L. (2025) · Biodiversidade Brasileira · doi:10.37002/biodiversidadebrasileira.v15i4.2443
Malukiewicz, J., Cartwright, R. A., Curi, N. H. A., Dergam, J. A., Igayara, C. S., Moreira, S. B., Molina, C. V., Nicola, P. A., Noll, A., Passamani, M., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14431670
Self-citationBoel, C. A. (2022) · UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) · doi:10.26190/unsworks/3147
Sánchez‐Vialas, A., Calatayud‐Mascarell, A., Ruiz, J. L., Recuero, E., & García‐París, M. (2026) · Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny · doi:10.3897/asp.84.e162254
Hybridisation in Primates: Cryptic Admixture and Adaptive Introgression
Kendall, C. J. R. (2025) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Ferreira, M. C., de Melo, F. R., & Hingst‐Zaher, E. (2026) · Biota Neotropica · doi:10.1590/1676-0611-bn-2026-1903
Reassessment of the morphological evidence for hominin hybrids in the Levant
White, S., & Stringer, C. B. (2026) · Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute · doi:10.1111/1467-9655.70216
Metadata
- Authors
- Fuzessy, L. F., Silva, I. D. O., Malukiewicz, J., Silva, F. F. R., Pônzio, M. D. C., Boere, V., & Ackermann, R. R.
- Affiliations
- Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
- Universidade Federal de Viçosa (BR)
- Arizona State University (US)
- University of Cape Town (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Ackermann, Rebecca Rogers
- Venue
- Evolutionary Biology
- Published
- 2014-06-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 480-493
- ISSN
- 0071-3260 (ISSN-L)
- 1934-2845
- OpenAlex
- W2048588685
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 3.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Evolutionary Biology (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
- Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Morphological variations and asymmetry
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Keywords
- marmoset, Callithrix penicillata, Callithrix geoffroyi, interspecific hybridization, hybrid zone, coat color, morphometric variation, phenotypic integration, mate preferences, gene flow
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
