MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010494127 · doi:10.1002/ece3.485

Contemporary effective population and metapopulation size (<i>N</i><sub>e</sub> and meta‐<i>N</i><sub>e</sub>): comparison among three salmonids inhabiting a fragmented system and differing in gene flow and its asymmetries

2013· article· en· W2010494127 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Gomez‐Uchida, Friso Palstra, Thomas W. Knight, Daniel E. Ruzzante

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsParks CanadaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsSalvelinusMetapopulationSalmoGene flowBiologyFontinalisPopulationEcologyCoalescent theoryEvolutionary biologyEffective population sizeTroutGenetic variationGeneticsPhylogeneticsGeneFish <Actinopterygii>Biological dispersalFisheryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We estimated local and metapopulation effective sizes ([Formula: see text] and meta-[Formula: see text]) for three coexisting salmonid species (Salmo salar, Salvelinus fontinalis, Salvelinus alpinus) inhabiting a freshwater system comprising seven interconnected lakes. First, we hypothesized that [Formula: see text] might be inversely related to within-species population divergence as reported in an earlier study (i.e., FST: S. salar> S. fontinalis> S. alpinus). Using the approximate Bayesian computation method implemented in ONeSAMP, we found significant differences in [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]) between species, consistent with a hierarchy of adult population sizes ([Formula: see text]). Using another method based on a measure of linkage disequilibrium (LDNE: [Formula: see text]), we found more finite [Formula: see text] values for S. salar than for the other two salmonids, in line with the results above that indicate that S. salar exhibits the lowest [Formula: see text] among the three species. Considering subpopulations as open to migration (i.e., removing putative immigrants) led to only marginal and non-significant changes in [Formula: see text], suggesting that migration may be at equilibrium between genetically similar sources. Second, we hypothesized that meta-[Formula: see text] might be significantly smaller than the sum of local [Formula: see text]s (null model) if gene flow is asymmetric, varies among subpopulations, and is driven by common landscape features such as waterfalls. One 'bottom-up' or numerical approach that explicitly incorporates variable and asymmetric migration rates showed this very pattern, while a number of analytical models provided meta-[Formula: see text] estimates that were not significantly different from the null model or from each other. Our study of three species inhabiting a shared environment highlights the importance and utility of differentiating species-specific and landscape effects, not only on dispersal but also in the demography of wild populations as assessed through local [Formula: see text]s and meta-[Formula: see text]s and their relevance in ecology, evolution and conservation.

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)0.002
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations45
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207