MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanisms of population differentiation in seabirds

2007· review· en· W1944868670 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhylogeographyGenetic structurePopulationBiological dispersalEvolutionary biologyAllopatric speciationIsolation by distanceEcologyGene flowEffective population sizePopulation geneticsGenetic variationGeneticsPhylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite recent advances in population genetic theory and empirical research, the extent of genetic differentiation among natural populations of animals remains difficult to predict. We reviewed studies of geographic variation in mitochondrial DNA in seabirds to test the importance of various factors in generating population genetic and phylogeographic structure. The extent of population genetic and phylogeographic structure varies extensively among species. Species fragmented by land or ice invariably exhibit population genetic structure and most also have phylogeographic structure. However, many populations (26 of 37) display genetic structure in the absence of land, suggesting that other barriers to gene flow exist. In these populations, the extent of genetic structure is best explained by nonbreeding distribution: almost all species with two or more population-specific nonbreeding areas (or seasons) have phylogeographic structure, and all species that are resident at or near breeding colonies year-round have population genetic structure. Geographic distance between colonies and foraging range appeared to have a weak influence on the extent of population genetic structure, but little evidence was found for an effect of colony dispersion or population bottlenecks. In two species (Galapagos petrel, Pterodroma phaeopygia, and Xantus's murrelet, Synthliboramphus hypoleucus), population genetic structure, and even phylogeographic structure, exist in the absence of any recognizable physical or nonphysical barrier, suggesting that other selective or behavioural processes such as philopatry may limit gene flow. Retained ancestral variation may be masking barriers to dispersal in some species, especially at high latitudes. Allopatric speciation undoubtedly occurs in this group, but reproductive isolation also appears to have evolved through founder-induced speciation, and there is strong evidence that parapatric and sympatric speciation occur. While many questions remain unanswered, results of the present review should aid conservation efforts by enabling managers to predict the extent of population differentiation in species that have not yet been studied using molecular markers, and, thus, enable the identification of management units and evolutionary significant units for conservation.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.280 · 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