MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966038228 · doi:10.1086/497441

Ontogenetic Patterns in Heritable Variation for Body Size: Using Random Regression Models in a Wild Ungulate Population

2005· article· en· W1966038228 on OpenAlexafffund
Alastair J. Wilson, Loeske E. B. Kruuk, David W. Coltman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilRoyal SocietyLeverhulme TrustUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsBiologyHeritabilityTraitSelection (genetic algorithm)RegressionGenetic variationPopulationUngulateRegression analysisNatural selectionGenetic correlationEvolutionary biologyAdditive genetic effectsEcologyStatisticsGeneticsDemographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Body size is an important determinant of fitness in many organisms. While size will typically change over the lifetime of an individual, heritable components of phenotypic variance may also show ontogenetic variation. We estimated genetic (additive and maternal) and environmental covariance structures for a size trait (June weight) measured over the first 5 years of life in a natural population of bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis. We also assessed the utility of random regression models for estimating these structures. Additive genetic variance was found for June weight, with heritability increasing over ontogeny because of declining environmental variance. This pattern, mirrored at the phenotypic level, likely reflects viability selection acting on early size traits. Maternal genetic effects were significant at ages 0 and 1, having important evolutionary implications for early weight, but declined with age being negligible by age 2. Strong positive genetic correlations between age-specific traits suggest that selection on June weight at any age will likely induce positively correlated responses across ontogeny. Random regression modeling yielded similar results to traditional methods. However, by facilitating more efficient data use where phenotypic sampling is incomplete, random regression should allow better estimation of genetic (co)variances for size and growth traits in natural populations.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations132
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207