Assessing the potential for maladaptation during active management of limber pine populations: a common garden study detects genetic differentiation in response to soil moisture in the Southern Rocky Mountains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active management is needed to sustain healthy limber pine (Pinus flexilis E. James) forests in the Southern Rocky Mountains (henceforth, Southern Rockies), as they are threatened by the interaction of the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) epidemic, climate change, and the spread of the non-native pathogen that causes white pine blister rust disease (Cronartium ribicola A. Dietr.). Appropriate source material for restoration and proactive introduction needs to be selected, taking into account potential genetic differentiation that would hamper management success. We conducted a common garden study in a greenhouse to determine the degree of genetic differentiation among limber pine populations in the Southern Rockies. We evaluated the differential responses of populations from northern and southern portions of the Southern Rockies to different moisture regimes during early seedling growth by measuring primary needle length, stem diameter, water potential, biomass allocation between root and shoot, and carbon isotope ratios (δ13C; a proxy for water-use efficiency). There were significant (p < 0.05) effects of source region for root length, stem diameter, needle length, and total dry mass, with seedlings from southern sources bigger than seedlings from northern sources. Furthermore, there was a marginally significant interaction between soil moisture regime and source region for carbon isotope ratio (p = 0.0778), suggesting possible local adaptation. These data indicate that genetic differentiation exists among populations in the Southern Rockies, potentially increasing the risk of maladaptation when moving seed far from its source for active management.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".