MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2040278159 · doi:10.1139/z00-170

Effective population size and genetic structure of a Piute ground squirrel (<i>Spermophilus mollis</i>) population

2001· article· en· W2040278159 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael F. Antolin, Beatrice Van Horne, Michael Berger, Alisha K. Holloway, Jennifer L. Roach, Ronald D. Weeks

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBiological dispersalPopulationEffective population sizeHabitat fragmentationGround squirrelGene flowEcologyHabitatPopulation sizeIsolation by distanceInbreedingGenetic variationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Piute ground squirrels (Spermophilus mollis) are distributed continuously in habitat dominated by native shrubs and perennial grasses in the Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area in Idaho, U.S.A. This habitat is being fragmented and replaced by exotic annual plants, changing it to a wildfire-dominated system that provides poor habitat for ground squirrels. To assess potential effects of this fragmentation on ground squirrel populations, we combined an estimate of effective population size (Ne) based upon a demographic study with a population genetic analysis. The study area included three subpopulations separated from each other by 8–13 km. The ratio of effective population size to census number (Ne/N) was 0.57. Combining Ne/N with dispersal distances from a radio-tracking study, we calculated that neighborhood size was 62.2 ha, which included between 204 and 480 individuals. Our population genetic analysis (based on randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and microsatellite markers) showed relatively low levels of genetic differentiation (Qpopulations[Formula: see text] 0.07–0.10) between subpopulations and no inbreeding within subpopulations (f = 0.0003). These estimates of population subdivision translate into an effective migration rate (Nem) of 2.3–3.3 per year, which represents a high level of gene flow. Invasion by exotics will reduce the overall productivity of the habitat, and will lead to isolation among subpopulations if favorable habitat patches become isolated.

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 score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→