The disappearing northern leopard frog (<i><scp>L</scp>ithobates pipiens</i>): conservation genetics and implications for remnant populations in western<scp>N</scp>evada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global amphibian declines suggest a major shift in the amount and quality of habitat for these sensitive taxa. Many species that were once widespread are now experiencing declines either in part of or across their historic range. The northern leopard frog (Rana [Lithobates] pipiens] has undergone significant declines particularly in the western United States and Canada. Leopard frog population losses in Nevada are largely due to habitat fragmentation and the introduction of nonnative fish, amphibian, and plant species. Only two populations remain in the Truckee and Carson River watersheds of western Nevada which represents the western boundary of this species range. We used sequence data for an 812 base pair fragment of the mitochondrial NADH dehydrogenase 1 (ND1) gene to support a native origin for western Nevada populations. All frogs had a single haplotype (W07) from the distinct western North America ND1 haplotype clade. Data from seven polymorphic microsatellite loci show that Truckee and Carson River populations are highly differentiated from each other and from leopard frogs collected from eastern Nevada sites. Lack of gene flow among and distinct color morphs among the western Nevada populations likely predates the current geographical isolation. Comparisons with other peripheral L. pipiens populations show western Nevada populations have similar levels of gene diversity despite their contemporary isolation (H(E) 0.411, 0.482). Restoration of leopard frog populations in these watersheds will be challenging given well-entrenched nonnative bullfrog populations and major changes to the riparian zone over the past century. Declines of once common amphibian species has become a major conservation concern. Contemporary isolation of populations on a species range periphery such as the leopard frog populations in the Truckee and Carson rivers further exacerbate extirpation risk as these populations are likely to have fewer genetic resources to adaptively respond to rapidly changing biotic and abiotic environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".