MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1867463865 · doi:10.1139/z2012-092

Population genetics study of common (<i>Pipistrellus pipistrellus</i>) and soprano (<i>Pipistrellus pygmaeus</i>) pipistrelle bats from central Europe suggests interspecific hybridization

2012· article· en· W1867463865 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Sztencel-Jabłonka, Wiesław Bogdanowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyZoologyInbreedingPopulationMicrosatelliteEcologyAlleleGeneticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery that the most widespread bat in Europe comprises cryptic species, Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber, 1774) (common pipistrelle) and Pipistrellus pygmaeus (Leach, 1825) (soprano pipistrelle), provides a great opportunity to look at the mechanism of species coexistence. Based on eight nuclear microsatellite loci (n = 353), we observed similarities between the species in Poland with respect to heterozygosity, allelic richness, mean relatedness, and inbreeding coefficients. However, pronounced differences in migratory patterns (shown by assignment tests) suggest that P. pygmaeus is the more migratory species. The proportion of bats migrating between colonies differed significantly, with 17.1% and 41.8% individuals of P. pygmaeus and P. pipistrellus, respectively, confidently assigned to colonies of origin. Both species demonstrated a more migratory character in central Europe compared with the populations from the British Isles. Given the cryptic nature of the examined taxa, we also assessed whether they hybridize. Hybridization was confirmed by three methods—one based on genetic distance and two based on Bayesian approaches. The overall hybridization rate, depending on assumed threshold values, ranged from 1.7% to 13.3% for both species. We conclude that the population structuring in these pipistrelles is not homogenous across their range. Moreover, hybridization between them in continental Europe does occur and is not rare.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207