MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2102906688 · doi:10.1139/z05-060

Sex-biased dispersal of greater long-tailed hamster (<i>Tscherskia triton</i>) revealed by microsatellites

2005· article· en· W2102906688 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mingjing Song, Zhibin Zhang, Karsten Neumann, Rolf Gattermann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyGenetic diversityBiological dispersalInbreedingLoss of heterozygosityMicrosatelliteAllelePopulationZoologyGenetic driftEcologyEvolutionary biologyGenetic variationGeneticsDemographyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For 2 consecutive years we studied the effect of dispersal on the genetic diversity of greater long-tailed hamsters (Tscherskia triton (de Winton, 1899)) in farmland habitat, Hebei Province, People's Republic of China. Level of genetic diversity was estimated by analyzing six highly polymorphic microsatellite loci in terms of mean d2, allele number, allelic diversity, effective number of alleles, allelic richness, average observed heterozygosity, and expected heterozygosity. The genetic diversity in populations from both two sites and 2 years indicated that the males contained higher levels of genetic diversity than the females, which supported our prediction that male-biased dispersal increased population genetic diversity. We also found significant departures from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium and a reduction in genetic diversity in samples from a partially isolated site, which was probably due to genetic drift, inbreeding, or a combination of these factors.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→