Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22628468›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2012

Out of the Neotropics: Late Cretaceous colonization of Australasia by American arthropods.

Prashant P Sharma, Gonzalo Giribet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Prashant P SharmaMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. psharma@fas.harvard.edu
Gonzalo Giribet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The origins of tropical southwest Pacific diversity are traditionally attributed to southeast Asia or Australia. Oceanic and fragment islands are typically colonized by lineages from adjacent continental margins, resulting in attrition of diversity with distance from the mainland. Here, we show that an exceptional tropical family of harvestmen with a trans-Pacific disjunct distribution has its origin in the Neotropics. We found in a multi-locus phylogenetic analysis that the opilionid family Zalmoxidae, which is distributed in tropical forests on both sides of the Pacific, is a monophyletic entity with basal lineages endemic to Amazonia and Mesoamerica. Indo-Pacific Zalmoxidae constitute a nested clade, indicating a single colonization event. Lineages endemic to putative source regions, including Australia and New Guinea, constitute derived groups. Divergence time estimates and probabilistic ancestral area reconstructions support a Neotropical origin of the group, and a Late Cretaceous (ca 82 Ma) colonization of Australasia out of the Fiji Islands and/or Borneo, which are consistent with a transoceanic dispersal event. Our results suggest that the endemic diversity within traditionally defined zoogeographic boundaries might have more complex evolutionary origins than previously envisioned.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAmericasAnimalsArachnidaAsia, SoutheasternAustralasiaBayes TheoremCell NucleusLikelihood FunctionsMaleMitochondriaMolecular Sequence DataPhylogeographySequence AlignmentSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID22628468
PMCPMC3396899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.