MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991897510 · doi:10.4141/p04-173

Effects of heavy grazing pressure on the random amplified polymorphic DNA marker diversity of mountain rough fescue (<i>Festuca campestris</i> Rydb.) in south western Alberta

2005· article· en· W1991897510 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Walter D. Willms, André Laroche

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingRAPDBiologyGrasslandGrazing pressureGenetic diversityFestucaLivestockAgronomyBotanyEcologyPoaceaePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Fescue Grassland is found in the western portion of the Northern Great Plains in Canada. Grazing and cultivation threaten this grassland, and a better understanding of its character is needed to preserve its integrity. Mountain rough fescue is highly sensitive to grazing during the growing season, which results in smaller plants and the death of some. The death of plants suggests the potential loss of genetic diversity. Therefore, we compared the genetic diversity of mountain rough fescue plants from sites in south western Alberta (50°12′N, 113°54′W) that had either been heavily grazed by livestock or left ungrazed for 52 yr to determine if grazing pressure had affected their genetic composition. Thirty-four and 43 plants were sampled in the spring of 2001 from very heavily grazed and ungrazed subpopulations, respectively, and their DNA was analyzed using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD). Of the 15 primers used, 12 generated an average of seven polymorphic loci each. Ten loci were present at a frequency of 0.10 or less in the heavily grazed subpopulation and six in the ungrazed subpopulation. RAPD marker diversity between the heavily grazed and ungrazed subpopulations of mountain rough fescue was mainly the result of frequency differences (P < 0.05) produced by 20% of the total markers that were examined, while the subpopulations accounted for only 4.37% of total heterozygosity. Therefore, grazing affected frequency of some markers but did not eliminate genes that may be linked with grazing sensitivity or tolerance. Lack of clear genetic segregation between the subpopulations might be caused by a high gene flow (Nm = 10.92). This mechanism requires further testing in order to prescribe a suitable management response for restoring overgrazed grasslands. Key words: RAPD frequency, F-statistics, genetic identity, genetic distance, gene flow

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)0.000
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 score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207