MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microgeographic genetic structure in the yellow‐pine chipmunk (<i>Tamias amoenus</i>)

2001· article· en· W2107082994 on OpenAlexaffabout
Albrecht I. Schulte‐Hostedde, H. Lisle Gibbs, John S. Millar

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyInbreedingGenetic structurePopulationEcologyEvolutionary biologyEffective population sizePopulation geneticsGenetic variationZoologyGeneticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there is evidence for broad-scale genetic structure in small mammals, few studies have used variable DNA-based genetic markers to examine genetic differentiation at microgeographic (tens of kilometres) scales. Yellow-pine chipmunks (Tamias amoenus) live in the heterogeneous landscape of the Rockies in southwest Alberta and are generally restricted to areas of low elevation. We used seven microsatellite loci to determine whether chipmunks show evidence of population genetic structure among three closely situated sites (< 15 km) in the Kananaskis Valley, Alberta. We found evidence for genetic structure in the form of significant differences in allele frequencies among populations and significantly nonzero values of FST for both overall and pairwise population comparisons. However, FIS values for each population were not significantly different from zero, suggesting little evidence for inbreeding within populations. Genetic differentiation probably occurs as a result of the strong effect of drift in very small (N(e) approximately 25) populations of these animals even in the face of substantial immigration rates.

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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.205
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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207