MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

POPULATION GENETICS OF THE WHITE-PHASED “SPIRIT” BLACK BEAR OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

2011· article· en· W1742025254 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philip W. Hedrick, Kermit Ritland

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAssortative matingGeneticsAllelePopulationGenetic driftHeterozygote advantageLocus (genetics)White (mutation)Founder effectGenotypePopulation geneticsEvolutionary biologyGeneMatingGenetic variationDemographyHaplotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Spirit (or Kermode) bear is a white-phased black bear found on the northwest coast of British Columbia, and is one of the most striking color polymorphisms found in mammals. A single nucleotide polymorphism at the melanocortin 1 receptor gene (mc1r) locus is the cause of this recessive w variant. Recently, evidence suggests that the white color provides a selective advantage during salmon hunting. Here we examine the effects of favorable selection, gene flow, genetic drift, and positive-assortative mating in an effort to understand the establishment and maintenance of this polymorphism and the observed heterozygote deficiency for mc1r but not for microsatellite loci. It appears that genetic drift was important in the establishment of the w allele and that the selective advantage was important to counteract immigration from populations without the w allele. Positive-assortative mating can result in a deficiency of heterozygotes but needs to be quite high to result in the large deficiency of heterozygotes observed, suggesting that other factors must also be contributing. Examination of population genetic factors, singly and jointly, provides insight into the establishment and maintenance of this unusual polymorphism.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations54
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207