A GENETIC ASSESSMENT OF THE EASTERN WOLF (CANIS LYCAON) IN ALGONQUIN PROVINCIAL PARK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent genetic data indicate that the eastern wolf is not a subspecies of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), but is a North American wolf more similar to the red wolf (C. rufus) and closely related to the coyote (C. latrans). The eastern wolf has been proposed as a separate species, C. lycaon. The largest protected area containing this wolf is Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario, Canada, which is bounded to the south by areas containing the Tweed wolf or eastern coyote, a hybrid of the western coyote and eastern wolf. We assessed the relationships of animals in the park by using DNA profiles that comprised the genotype from 17 autosomal and 4 Y-linked microsatellite loci and the mitochondrial DNA control region. These profiles were used to establish maternity, paternity, and kin relationships for 102 wolves that were studied from 24 packs over a 12-year period. Genetic data do not support the hypothesis that a pack comprises an unrelated breeding pair and their offspring. There is evidence of frequent pack splitting, pack fusion, and adoption. Some unrelated individuals in the packs were identified as immigrants into the park. We found high levels of genetic structuring between the Tweed wolves to the southeast and the Algonquin Park wolves (RST = 0.114). Lower levels of genetic differentiation with animals to the north and west (RST = 0.057 and RST = 0.036) and high genetic diversity suggest that park animals are not an island population but the southern part of a larger metapopulation of C. lycaon.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".