MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modelling the genetics and demography of step cline formation: gastropod populations preyed on by experimentally introduced crabs

2007· article· en· W1566045281 on OpenAlexafffund
Elizabeth G. Boulding, Tyson Hay, Meike Holst, Stephanie J. Kamel, D. PAKES, Angela Tie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evolutionary Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCline (biology)BiologyPredationEcologyIntertidal zonePopulationRocky shoreSelection (genetic algorithm)SnailPredatorZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether a prey population goes extinct or adapts in response to an invading predator may depend on the number of contiguous populations that experience increased predation. We created invaded snail populations by building shelters for predatory shore crabs on a rocky intertidal bench. The crabs preyed selectively on thin-shelled snails tethered next to the shelters but did not prey on those more than 2 m away. This caused strong directional selection for increased shell thickness in populations close to the shelters but did not change selection in those farther away. The field experiment was used to parameterize a new individual-based quantitative genetic model that included demography. In the model a detectable step cline in shell thickness evolved rapidly even though the region of increased predation was shorter than Slatkin's characteristic length. The cline's step size in the model was similar to that measured in the field 10 years after the experiment began.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evolutionary BiologySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207