Cytoplasmic DNA variation in and genetic delimitation of<i>Abies nephrolepis</i>and<i>Abies holophylla</i>in northeastern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has recently been hypothesized that genetic markers experiencing high rates of gene flow would be better suited to differentiate closely related species. We tested this hypothesis by examining genetic variation in the chloroplast (cp) DNA (trnS–trnG and trnL–trnF) and mitochondrial (mt) DNA (nad5 intron 4 and nad7 intron 1) of two fir species, Abies nephrolepis (Trautv.) Maxim. and Abies holophylla Maxim., with overlapping distributions in northeastern China. Two mitotypes were identified; one was common to both species, whereas the other occurred only in A. holophylla. However, four chlorotypes were identified, clustered into two species-specific groups exhibiting distinct mutations; species delimitation using these generated genetic variants was congruent with those obtained by morphological delimitation. Our findings supported the hypotheses that cpDNA, with its high rates of gene flow, is more useful than mtDNA for species delimitation in fir trees. In addition, the low intraspecific diversity observed for both species may result from their repeated range retractions and expansions in response to climatic oscillations in the history.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".