MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065315823 · doi:10.1111/ddi.12253

Influence of hybridization on niche shifts in expanding coyote populations

2014· article· en· W2065315823 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel H. Thornton, Dennis L. Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity and Distributions · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersTrent UniversityWashington State University
KeywordsNicheEcological nicheEcologyIntrogressionBiologyRange (aeronautics)Niche segregationCompetition (biology)Niche differentiationHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim The degree to which niches of species change over time or space has important implications for ecology and evolutionary biology. However, conditions that give rise to niche shifts remain poorly understood. In particular, the relative influence of release from predation or competition (change in realized niche) vs. genetically based alterations (change in fundamental niche) has received little attention. We studied niche shifts in expanding coyote (Canis latrans) populations. During expansion from their historic range, coyotes experienced marked changes in competitive regimes and also genetic changes (i.e. hybridization), and these alterations occurred unevenly across the expanding front. The goal of this study was to determine the presence and degree of niche shifts in expanding coyote populations and the potential influence of hybridization on these patterns. Location North America. Methods We developed species distribution models and compared climatic niche overlap between historic and expanding coyote populations with different levels of genetic introgression with wolves. We also developed harvest models to examine differences in how coyote and coyote hybrids responded to human disturbance and land use. Results Niche differentiation is most pronounced for expanding coyote populations that have experienced substantial hybridization with wolves. An examination of response curves suggests that coyotes in the north‐east may have shifted to a more wolflike niche. Main conclusions Hybridization or other processes that promote genetic changes in populations may be associated with niche shifts. These findings help explain why hybridization often leads to increased invasiveness, and further support the notion that genetic differentiation below the level of species can lead to niche divergence. Our results also highlight the caution needed when predicting distributional changes due to invasion or climate change, particularly among populations exposed to genetic change.

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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversity and DistributionsSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207