MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134676474 · doi:10.7557/3.2607

Microsatellite assessment of walrus (<i>Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus</i>) stocks in Canada

2013· article· en· W2134676474 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aaron B. A. Shafer, Corey S. Davis, David W. Coltman, Robert E. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueNAMMCO Scientific Publications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNunavut Wildlife Research TrustPinngortitaleriffik
KeywordsBayPopulationStock (firearms)ArcticGene flowGeographyBiologyFisheryStock assessmentMicrosatelliteEcologyGenetic variationDemographyFishingGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Walruses in Canada are currently subdivided into seven stocks based on summering areas; Western Jones Sound (WJS), Baffin Bay (BB), Penny Strait-Lancaster Sound (PS-LS), North Foxe Basin (N-FB), Central Foxe Basin (C-FB), Hudson Bay Davis Strait (HB-DS) and Southern and Eastern Hudson Bay (SE-HB). In this study, walrus were sampled from six of the seven stocks (SE-HB samples were not available) and genotyped at 10 microsatellite loci. All stocks were genetically diverse (average heterozygosity of 0.58) with no evidence of inbreeding (average FIS of 0.03). We detected significant genetic differentiation among the stocks and a pattern of genetic spatial autocorrelation that suggests a moderate effect of geographic distance on gene flow among stocks. Bayesian clustering suggested the six recognized stocks were elements of two larger genetic clusters - a northern Arctic population (containing BB, WJS, and PS-LS stocks) and a central Arctic population (containing C-FB, N-FB, and HB-DS stocks). These populations are moderately differentiated (FST = 0.07), but based on evidence of contemporary movement from assignment tests, are not completely isolated. There was support for maintaining the WJS stock and a combined BB+PS-LS stock, although the latter conclusion is based on a small sample size. Similarly, there was some evidence suggesting separation of the Foxe Basin stocks from the HB-DS but not the N-FB from the C-FB stock. However, given that there are morphological and chemical differences between N-FB and C-FB stocks, there is currently insufficient evidence to support a revision of the current stock designations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNAMMCO Scientific PublicationsSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207