The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Species detection and individual assignment in species delimitation: can integrative data increase efficacy?
Open accessAbstract
Statistical species delimitation usually relies on singular data, primarily genetic, for detecting putative species and individual assignment to putative species. Given the variety of speciation mechanisms, singular data may not adequately represent the genetic, morphological and ecological diversity relevant to species delimitation. We describe a methodological framework combining multivariate and clustering techniques that uses genetic, morphological and ecological data to detect and assign individuals to putative species. Our approach recovers a similar number of species recognized using traditional, qualitative taxonomic approaches that are not detected when using purely genetic methods. Furthermore, our approach detects groupings that traditional, qualitative taxonomic approaches do not. This empirical test suggests that our approach to detecting and assigning individuals to putative species could be useful in species delimitation despite varying levels of differentiation across genetic, phenotypic and ecological axes. This work highlights a critical, and often overlooked, aspect of the process of statistical species delimitation—species detection and individual assignment. Irrespective of the species delimitation approach used, all downstream processing relies on how individuals are initially assigned, and the practices and statistical issues surrounding individual assignment warrant careful consideration.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data
Heled, J., & Drummond, A. J. (2010) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msp274 · Cited by 2,453
Bayesian species delimitation using multilocus sequence data
Yang, Z., & Rannala, B. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0913022107 · Cited by 1,405
Bauer, A. M., Parham, J. F., Brown, R. M., Stuart, B. L., Grismer, L., Papenfuss, T. J., Böhme, W., Savage, J. M., Carranza, S., Grismer, J. L., et al. (2011) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1330 · Cited by 106
Cited by
Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept
Fišer, C., Robinson, C. T., & Malard, F. (2018) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.14486 · Cited by 574
Gómez Daglio, L., & Dawson, M. N. (2017) · Invertebrate Systematics · doi:10.1071/is16055 · Cited by 98
Metadata
- Authors
- Edwards, D. L., & Knowles, L. L.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2014-02-22
- Volume
- 281
- Issue
- 1777
- Pages
- 20132765
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2033531754
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Species detection and individual assignment in species delimitation: can integrative data increase efficacy? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.2013.2765
- The paper
- Edwards, D. L., & Knowles, L. L. (2014). Species detection and individual assignment in species delimitation: can integrative data increase efficacy? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2765
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.