MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134638011 · doi:10.1139/f02-013

Accounting for local physiological adaptation in bioenergetic models: testing hypotheses for growth rate evolution by virtual transplant experiments

2002· article· en· W2134638011 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stephan B. Munch, David O. Conover

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShandong Academy of Sciences
KeywordsBiologyPopulationPopulation growthEcologyBioenergeticsAdaptation (eye)LatitudePopulation modelGrowth rateEctothermCline (biology)MathematicsDemographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We constructed bioenergetic models for locally adapted populations of Atlantic silversides, Menidia menidia, from different latitudes (Nova Scotia and South Carolina) to determine how genetic variation in growth physiology affects model parameters and predicted growth and to test two hypotheses on the evolution of countergradient variation in growth rate. Model parameters were estimated simultaneously for each population through a penalized likelihood approach incorporating laboratory measurements of metabolism, specific dynamic action, consumption, and growth. The resulting population-specific parameters differed by an average of 28%. The models were validated by successful (R2 > 0.9) prediction of growth in independent experiments under natural light and temperature conditions and by predicting growth in the field (R2 > 0.95). We then performed virtual reciprocal transplant simulations to test the alternative hypotheses that growth rate along a latitudinal gradient evolves in response to temperature or resource availability. Predictions for each transplanted population deviated significantly from observed growth for each native population, demonstrating the importance of accounting for interpopulation variation in model parameters. Our results indicate that the latitudinal cline in growth rate cannot be explained solely by thermal adaptation but may have arisen owing to the combined effects of temperature and food availability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.137 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations42
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207