Assessing Genetic Diversity of Canada Thistle (<i>Cirsium arvense</i>) in North America with Microsatellites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invasive species such as Canada thistle pose a significant threat to ecosystems. The risk of introducing invasive species has increased with human activities, and the effects of such events have economic and aesthetic impacts. Native to Europe, Canada thistle is now established throughout temperate North America. Although there is documentation of early occurrences to North America, little is known on how it has become established in diverse habitats or how it continues to spread. We examined genetic diversity within and among nearly 1,700 Canada thistle individuals from 85 North American locations with the use of seven microsatellite markers in order to address these questions. PAUP and STRUCTURE programs were used to assess genetic diversity and relationships within and between populations. Populations exhibited greater within-population diversity (> 60%) than expected for a reported clonally reproducing species. Total diversity of sampled locations in North America (0.183) was less than previously reported for European locations (0.715), but the greater mean difference between North American populations (0.264 relative to 0.246 from England) suggests strong founder effects or restriction of gene flow influencing individual populations. Furthermore, analyses identified numerous instances where individuals from geographically distant regions clustered together, indicating long-distance translocation of propogules. However, isolation by distance analysis showed significant correlation between location and population genetic distances ( r = 0.1917, P = 0.006). Within populations, nearly 92% of individuals sampled harbored unique multilocus genotypes, strongly suggesting that sexual reproduction is common. Within populations, analysis of genetic structure indicated significant admixture of genotypes throughout the invasive range in North America. The recurrent distribution of seed throughout North America has led to a highly diverse gene pool and increased the adaptive success Canada thistle to a wide variety of habitats. Future technologies developed for control of Canada thistle should consider this diversity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".