Allopatric origins of sympatric brook charr populations: colonization history and admixture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural selection is presumed to be the driving force behind the occurrence of phenotypically and genetically divergent populations in sympatry within many north temperate freshwater fishes. If, however, these populations have different ancestral origins, history could also contribute to their divergence. We previously found evidence for the role of selection in the evolution of divergent outflow and inflow breeding populations of migratory brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) inhabiting postglacial Mistassini Lake (Quebec, Canada). Here, we show that these populations do not have a common origin, through the use of admixture and spatial analyses with seven microsatellite loci. Divergent populations clustered into two different population groups when compared to samples from surrounding drainages, although inflow populations appeared to be more admixed between the two population groups than the outflow population. These results are noteworthy since outflow and inflow populations were monomorphic at mitochondrial DNA (338-bp sequence of the control region) and are only moderately differentiated (mean F(ST) = 0.10). Colonization by two ancestral populations was also consistent with known outflow direction changes throughout lake formation. In addition to providing insight into how phenotypic divergence in sympatry may have been affected by the nature (i.e. timing and direction) of colonization of ancestral populations, our results also suggest that ancestral populations may have differed in their ability to colonize certain lake habitats.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".