Developing seed zones and transfer guidelines with multivariate regression trees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Managing seed movement is an important component of forest resource management to minimize maladaptation of planting stock in forest plantations. Here, we describe a new approach to analyze geographic patterns of adaptive and neutral genetic variation in forest trees and to link this genetic information to geographic variables for the delineation of seed zones and the development of seed transfer guidelines. We apply multivariate regression trees to partition genetic variation, using a set of environmental or geographic predictor variables as partitioning criteria in a series of dichotomous splits of the genetic dataset. The method can be applied to any type of genetic data (growth, adaptive, or marker traits) and can simultaneously evaluate multiple traits observed over several environments. The predictor variables can be categorical (e.g., ecosystem of seed source), continuous (e.g., geographic or climate variables), or a combination of both. Different sets of predictor variables can be used for different purposes: In two case studies for aspen and red alder, we show (1) how latitude, longitude, and elevation of seed sources in a provenance trial can be used to develop simple seed transfer guidelines; (2) how ecosystem classes and elevation as predictor variables can be used to delineate seed zones and breeding regions; and (3) how climate variables as predictors can reveal adaptation of genotypes to the environments in which they occur. Partitioning of genetic variation appears very robust regarding the choice of predictor variables, and we find that the method is a powerful aid for interpreting complex genetic datasets.
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 | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".