Identification and characterization of the contact zone between short-tailed shrews (<i>Blarina</i>) in Iowa and Missouri
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short-tailed shrews (genus Blarina Gray, 1838) are characterized by divergent karyotypes and are genetically distinct. Blarina species are similar morphologically but, in most cases, can be distinguished morphometrically. Blarina distributions tend to be parapatric along well-defined contact zones; however, it has been suggested that the northern short-tailed shrew ( Blarina brevicauda (Say, 1823)) and Elliot’s short-tailed shrew ( Blarina hylophaga Elliot, 1899) occur sympatrically in Iowa and Missouri. To evaluate this possibility, 179 specimens were collected in southwestern Iowa and northwestern Missouri. Karyotypes and total length were used for field identification, and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis was used to verify field identifications and to investigate the extent of hybridization. One hundred seventy-eight of 179 specimens were identified to species. The one exception had a karyotype of B. brevicauda (2n = 50, FN = 48); however, AFLP analysis indicated that this individual was likely an F1hybrid. No backcrosses were detected, so it appears that introgression is minimal. The putative hybrid was trapped at a locality with B. brevicauda just north of a locality having only B. hylophaga. No locality contained both species. Therefore, these species are not broadly sympatric as has been suggested, but rather exhibit a distribution similar to the pattern of parapatry seen in most of the contact zones of Blarina.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".