Population genetic variation, structure, and evolution in Engelmann spruce, white spruce, and their natural hybrid complex in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic variation, structure, and evolution of 12 populations of putative Engelmann spruce ( Picea engelmanii Parry), white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss), and Engelmann - white spruce natural hybrids from the sympatric areas and two populations of white spruce from the allopatric areas in Alberta were examined using 23 allozyme loci coding for 13 enzymes in needles. Although most of the alleles were widespread, unique alleles were found in 9 of the 14 populations. No species-specific allele was observed. However, allele frequency differences were observed between the putative Engelmann and white spruce populations at a number of loci. Frequencies of 13 alleles showed significant correlation with altitude, those of 11 alleles showed correlation with latitude, and those of 3 alleles showed correlation with longitude. On average, 66.2% (99% criterion) of the loci were polymorphic, the number of alleles per locus was 1.88, the number of alleles per polymorphic locus was 2.88, and the observed and expected heterozygosities were 0.063 and 0.184, respectively. Genetic variability of allopatric white spruce, putative Engelmann, sympatric white spruce, and hybrid populations was quite comparable. The mean FST estimate was 0.123 for the total populations. Ca- nonical discriminant functions separated four putative Engelmann spruce populations from the fifth putative Engelmann spruce population and from the allopatric and sympatric white spruce and sympatric putative hybrid populations. A cluster analysis from genetic distances generally separated allopatric and sympatric white spruce populations from the putative Engelmann spruce and hybrid populations. A Wagner tree of the 14 populations produced two main branches; one branch consisting of two allopatric and two sympatric white spruce and one putative hybrid populations, and an- other branch consisting of the remaining nine spruce populations representing putative Engelmann spruce, putative hy- brids, and sympatric white spruce. Putative hybrids showed lower distances to white spruce from the canonical discriminant analysis, whereas they showed lower distances to putative Engelmann spruce from the genetic distance analysis. High allozyme genetic identities between putative Engelmann and white spruce and allelic differentiation re- lated to altitude in Alberta suggest that Engelmann spruce could at best be considered as a subspecies of Picea glauca, with white spruce named as Picea glauca ssp. glauca and Engelmann spruce named as Picea glauca ssp. engelmannii.
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".