MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heritability of life‐history tactics and genetic correlation with body size in a natural population of brook charr (<i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>)

2007· article· en· W2002482409 on OpenAlexaff
Veronique Thériault, Dany Garant, Louis Bernatchez, Julian J. Dodson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evolutionary Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalvelinusBiologyHeritabilityFish migrationGenetic correlationLife history theoryFontinalisPopulationZoologyNatural selectionEvolutionary biologyEcologyDemographyGenetic variationLife historyFisheryGeneticsTroutFish <Actinopterygii>Gene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common dimorphism in life-history tactic in salmonids is the presence of an anadromous pathway involving a migration to sea followed by a freshwater reproduction, along with an entirely freshwater resident tactic. Although common, the genetic and environmental influence on the adoption of a particular life-history tactic has rarely been studied under natural conditions. Here, we used sibship-reconstruction based on microsatellite data and an 'animal model' approach to estimate the additive genetic basis of the life-history tactic adopted (anadromy vs. residency) in a natural population of brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis. We also assess its genetic correlation with phenotypic correlated traits, body size and body shape. Significant heritability was observed for life-history tactic (varying from 0.52 to 0.56 depending on the pedigree scenario adopted) as well as for body size (from 0.44 to 0.50). There was also a significant genetic correlation between these two traits, whereby anadromous fish were genetically associated with bigger size at age 1 (r(G) = -0.52 and -0.61). Our findings thus indicate that life-history tactics in this population have the potential to evolve in response to selection acting on the tactic itself or indirectly via selection on body size. This study is one of the very few to have successfully used sibship-reconstruction to estimate quantitative genetic parameters under wild conditions.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations115
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evolutionary BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207