ArticleSystematic biology2025
Integrating Deep Learning Derived Morphological Traits and Molecular Data for Total-Evidence Phylogenetics: Lessons from Digitized Collections.
Article in Systematic biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Building phenotypic character matrices for phylogenetic inference: exploration of 35 years of practice.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Pooled it
- Phylogenetic Inference from Atomized 3D Morphometric Data: A Case Study using Kangaroos.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Connecting links with code: AI in morphological evolution.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Toward a Comprehensive Anatomical Matrix for Crown Birds: Phylogenetic Insights from the Pectoral Girdle and Forelimb Skeleton.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deep learning has previously shown success in automatically generating morphological traits that carry a phylogenetic signal. In this paper, we explore combining molecular data with deep learning derived morphological traits from images of pinned insects to generate total-evidence phylogenies and we reveal challenges. Deep learning derived morphological traits, while informative, underperformed when used in isolation compared to molecular analyses. However, they can improve molecular results in total evidence settings. We use a dataset of rove beetle images to compare the effect of different dataset splits and deep metric loss functions on morphological and total evidence results. We find a slight preference for the cladistic dataset split and contrastive loss function. Additionally, we explore the effect of varying the number of genes used in inference and find that different gene combinations provide the best results when used on their own vs in total evidence analysis. Despite the promising nature of integrating deep learning techniques with molecular data, challenges remain regarding the strength of the phylogenetic signal and the resource demands of data acquisition. We suggest that future work focus on improved trait extraction and the development of disentangled networks to better interpret the derived traits, thus expanding the applicability of these methods in phylogenetic studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.