MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1955465428 · doi:10.1139/b2012-064

Genetic variation and structure in endangered populations of<i>Sphagnum palustre</i>L. in Italy: a molecular approach to evaluate threats and survival ability

2012· article· en· W1955465428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stefano Terracciano, Simonetta Giordano, Ilaria Bonini, Luca Miserere, Valeria Spagnuolo

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMantel testGenetic variationThreatened speciesGenetic diversityIntraspecific competitionEndangered speciesEcologyGenetic structurePopulationBiological dispersalZoologyHabitatDemographyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conservation status of endangered Italian populations of the peatmoss Sphagnum palustre L. was evaluated through the study of their intraspecific genetic variation and structure. One-hundred-thirty-eight shoots from four populations were analyzed by 35 inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) loci. Molecular diversity indices highlight a general low level of variation, which is higher in centre-northern populations than in the southernmost one. AMOVA indicates that most variation is partitioned among populations, supporting a low level of gene flow and a severe isolation among them (F ST = 0.7071–0.9198; Nm = 0.106). Mantel test gave a significant correlation (0.8634, P = 0.0083) between genetic and geographical distances. A strong association among loci suggests that recombination due to sexual reproduction contributes poorly to genetic variation observed, supported by the lack of sporophytes in the study areas. Both experimental results and theoretical predictions suggest a concrete risk of local extinction for the studied populations, further increased by fragile habitats hosting the species in Italy. The southernmost population is the most threatened, due to combined effects of lower genetic variation and geographic isolation.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207