Perspectives on the use of landscape genetics to detect genetic adaptive variation in the field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the genetic basis of species adaptation in the context of global change poses one of the greatest challenges of this century. Although we have begun to understand the molecular basis of adaptation in those species for which whole genome sequences are available, the molecular basis of adaptation is still poorly understood for most non-model species. In this paper, we outline major challenges and future research directions for correlating environmental factors with molecular markers to identify adaptive genetic variation, and point to research gaps in the application of landscape genetics to real-world problems arising from global change, such as the ability of organisms to adapt over rapid time scales. High throughput sequencing generates vast quantities of molecular data to address the challenge of studying adaptive genetic variation in non-model species. Here, we suggest that improvements in the sampling design should consider spatial dependence among sampled individuals. Then, we describe available statistical approaches for integrating spatial dependence into landscape analyses of adaptive genetic variation.
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 | 0.087 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".