MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Limited differentiation in microsatellite DNA variation among northern populations of the yellow warbler: evidence for male‐biased gene flow?

2000· article· en· W2082337299 on OpenAlexaff
H. Lisle Gibbs, Robert J. G. Dawson, Keith A. Hobson

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGene flowWarblerBiological dispersalMicrosatelliteMitochondrial DNAEvolutionary biologyPopulationGenetic variationReproductive isolationGeneticsZoologyEcologyGeneDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparisons of the patterns of differentiation among genetic markers with different modes of inheritance can provide insights into patterns of sex-biased dispersal and gene flow. Here, we compare the patterns of differentiation in six microsatellite loci among eight northern breeding populations of the yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia) with results obtained with mitochondrial DNA. Significant but low levels of differentiation (overall FST = 0.014; overall RST = 0.015) were present across all populations. The level of differentiation is substantially less than that observed in the same samples based on mitochondrial DNA control region variation. The presence of low population imbalance index values and significant isolation-by-distance relationships for both FST and RST suggests that these populations are at evolutionary equilibrium and that the high degree of similarity between populations may be due to high levels of male-biased gene flow. This suggests that there may be significant but previously unappreciated differences in the long-distance and/or episodic dispersal behaviour of males and females in these birds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations104
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207