MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113141724 · doi:10.1093/jhered/esq062

Phylogeography of 3 North Atlantic Wolffish species (Anarhichas spp.) with Phylogenetic Relationships within the Family Anarhichadidae

2010· article· en· W2113141724 on OpenAlexafffund
Megan R. McCusker, Paul Bentzen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heredity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityHong Kong Institute of EducationMicrosoft
KeywordsBiologyPhylogeographyMitochondrial DNANucleotide diversityGlacial periodEcologyPopulationRange (aeronautics)Phylogenetic treeDemographic historyZoologyEvolutionary biologyGenetic variationGeneticsHaplotypePaleontologyGenotypeDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phylogenetic analyses of all 4 wolffish species (Atlantic, Spotted, Northern, and Bering wolffishes) and the Wolfeel were assessed with both mitochondrial (D-loop and ND1) and nuclear (amplified fragment length polymorphism) DNA to resolve relationships within the family Anarhichadidae. Species-specific mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutation rates were estimated based on 2 possible dates of divergence between the Pacific and Atlantic lineages. Phylogeographic patterns within each of the 3 North Atlantic wolffishes were investigated with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations based on mtDNA to determine whether population size changes occurred following the last glaciation and where wolffishes likely survived glaciation. All 3 species of North Atlantic wolffishes showed evidence of postglacial expansion but did not show evidence of persistence in multiple refugia in both the eastern and western Atlantic Ocean. Rather, the data supported persistence in a single refuge, with postglacial expansion into the rest of the range. Nucleotide diversity, in particular, was low in wolffishes compared with other marine fishes, possibly related to reductions in population sizes during the last glaciation.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HereditySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207