MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006678994 · doi:10.1139/z05-159

A reconnaissance of population genetic variation in arctic and subarctic sulfur butterflies (<i>Colias</i>spp.; Lepidoptera, Pieridae)

2005· article· en· W2006678994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christopher W. Wheat, Ward B. Watt, Christian L. Boutwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyPieridaeEcologySubspeciesRange (aeronautics)PopulationSubarctic climateZoologyLepidoptera genitalia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genotype–phenotype–environment interactions in temperate-zone species of Colias Fabricius, 1807 have been well studied in evolutionary terms. Arctic and alpine habitats present a different range of ecological, especially thermal, conditions under which such work could be extended across species and higher clades. To this end, we survey variation in three genes that code for phosphoglucose isomerase (PGI), phosphoglucomutase (PGM), and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) in seven arctic and alpine Colias taxa (one only for G6PD). These genes are highly polymorphic in all taxa studied. Patterns of variation for the PGI gene in these northern taxa suggest that the balancing selection seen at this gene in temperate-zone taxa may extend throughout northern North America. Comparative study of these taxa may thus give insight into the mechanisms driving genetic differentiation among subspecies, species, and broader clades, supporting the study of both micro- and macro-evolutionary questions.

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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207