MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postglacial range expansion from northern refugia by the wood frog,<i>Rana sylvatica</i>

2007· article· en· W2129597549 on OpenAlexaff
Julie A. Lee‐Yaw, Jason T. Irwin, David M. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhylogeographyEcologyRange (aeronautics)Intraspecific competitionLineage (genetic)Genetic diversityDemographic historyEvolutionary biologyGenetic variationPhylogenetic treePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the range dynamics of North American amphibians during the last glacial cycle are increasingly better understood, the recolonization history of the most northern regions and the impact of southern refugia on patterns of intraspecific genetic diversity and phenotypic variation in these regions are not well reconstructed. Here we present the phylogeographic history of a widespread and primarily northern frog, Rana sylvatica. We surveyed 551 individuals from 116 localities across the species' range for a 650-bp region of the NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2 and tRNA(TRP) mitochondrial genes. Our phylogenetic analyses revealed two distinct clades corresponding to eastern and western populations, as well as a Maritime subclade within the eastern lineage. Patterns of genetic diversity support multiple refugia. However, high-latitude refugia in the Appalachian highlands and modern-day Wisconsin appear to have had the biggest impact on northern populations. Clustering analyses based on morphology further support a distinction between eastern and western wood frogs and suggest that postglacial migration has played an important role in generating broad-scale patterns of phenotypic variation in this species.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations103
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207