MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1548300997 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815683.009

Niche dimensionality and ecological speciation

2001· book-chapter· en· W1548300997 on OpenAlexaff
Patrik Nosil, Luke J. Harmon

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcological speciationAllopatric speciationParapatric speciationReproductive isolationBiologySympatryEcologySympatric speciationGenetic algorithmEcological nicheEvolutionary biologyNicheEcological selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)PopulationHabitatGenetic variationGene flowGeneticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ecological niche plays a central role in the process of ‘ecological speciation’, in which divergent selection between niches drives the evolution of reproductive isolation (Muller 1942; Mayr 1947, 1963; Schluter & Nagel 1995; Funk 1998; Schluter 2000). Ecological by-product speciation occurs because ecological traits that have diverged between populations via divergent selection, or traits that are genetically correlated with such traits, incidentally affect reproductive isolation. This process can occur under any geographic arrangement of populations (e.g. allopatry, parapatry or sympatry). A central prediction of ecological speciation is that ecologically divergent pairs of populations will exhibit greater levels of reproductive isolation than ecologically similar pairs of populations of similar age. Another prediction is that traits under divergent selection, or those genetically correlated with them, should often incidentally affect reproductive isolation (e.g. mate preference, hybrid fitness). In recent years, these predictions have been supported in a range of taxa (see Feder et al . 1994; Funk 1998; Via 1999; Rundle et al . 2000; Jiggins et al . 2001; Funk et al . 2002, 2006; Bradshaw & Schemske 2003; Rundle & Nosil 2005; and Funk, this volume, for review), and processes such as resource competition and predation are now known to be involved (Mallet & Barton 1989; Schluter 1994; Rundle et al . 2003; Vamosi 2005; Nosil & Crespi 2006a).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207