MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Historical and ecological correlates of body shape in the brook stickleback, Culaea inconstans

2009· article· en· W1758617005 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica Ward, Deborah A. McLennan

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Journal of the Linnean Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Resources CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsBiologyAllopatric speciationRange (aeronautics)Refugium (fishkeeping)EcologySympatric speciationLineage (genetic)HabitatEvolutionary biologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using geometric morphometric methods, we evaluated the correlation between phenotypic variation and available historical and habitat information for two genetically differentiated, allopatric lineages of a widespread North American species, the brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans). The results obtained revealed strong patterns of structured phenotypic differentiation across the species range with extreme phenotypes occurring at the northwest and southeast range boundaries. Shape variation was broadly congruent with the distribution of two mitochondrial DNA lineages; a deep-bodied eastern form (Atlantic refugium) and a slim-bodied western form (Mississippian refugium); however, the two forms were not lineage-specific and phenotypic cladistic diversification is likely to be an artefact of underlying clinal variation associated with longitudinal and latitudinal gradients. In addition, we found little evidence of diagnosable lake and river forms across North America. Taken together, large-scale patterns of phenotypic diversity observed in C. inconstans suggest that relatively recent factors, such as continually varying natural selection across the range and/or potential local gene flow, may substantially mitigate the effects of historical separation or a generalized adaptive response to alternative habitats.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207