MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107090194 · doi:10.1525/cond.2013.120117

Fine-Scale Analysis Reveals Cryptic Patterns of Genetic Structure in Canada Geese

2013· article· en· W2107090194 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Finnegan, Sarrah Castillo, Jack T. Hughes, Ken Abraham, Rodney W. Brook, Christopher J. Kyle

Bibliographic record

VenueOrnithological Applications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspeciesGenetic structureBiologyMicrosatelliteEvolutionary biologyPopulationPhilopatryGenetic variationGooseEcologyZoologyGeneticsDemographyBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In migratory birds, population-genetic structure is generally low, but philopatric species can have fine-scale patterns of differentiation. We investigated the population-genetic structure of the Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) across multiple spatial scales to determine whether genetic data support current delineations of subspecies and populations for management. We collected samples from two subspecies (B. c. interior and B. c.maxima) and four management populations across Ontario and Quebec. Using 7 microsatellites and 442 base pairs of mtDNA we found that genetic structure varied with scale. FST revealed low levels of genetic differentiation between subspecies and management populations, and individual-based clustering revealed no genetic differentiation. However, fine-scale spatial autocorrelation revealed significant levels of relatedness at distances <85 km. The lack of clear genetic structure may reflect recent human management. That our fine-scale analysis revealed significant genetic relationships suggests that genetic structure may increase and in time reflect that revealed by banding data. As our markers were unable to accurately distinguish between subspecies they will be of little use in estimating subspecific contribution to harvested stock. Alternative molecular markers under selective pressure may be more informative in assess targets for harvest.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrnithological ApplicationsSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207