Diversity and genetic structure in populations of<i>Pseudotsuga menziesii</i>(Pinaceae) at chloroplast microsatellite loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic variation was compared between uniparentally-inherited (chloroplast simple sequence repeats, cpSSRs) vs. biparentally-inherited (isozyme and random amplified polymorphic DNA, RAPD) genetic markers in Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga mensiezii) from British Columbia. Three-hundred twenty-three individuals from 11 populations were assayed. In Douglas-fir, the cpSSR primer sites were well-conserved relative to Pinus thunbergii (11 of 17 loci clearly amplified), but only 3 loci were appreciably polymorphic. At these cpSSR loci, we found an unexpectedly low level of polymorphism within populations, and no genetic differentiation among populations. By contrast, the nuclear markers showed variation typical of conifers, with significant among-population differentiation. This difference is likely the outcome of both historical factors and high pollen dispersal.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".