Range‐edge effects promote clonal growth in peripheral populations of the one‐sided wintergreen <i>Orthilia secunda</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Existing in suboptimal conditions is a frequent occurrence for species inhabiting the cusp of their ecological range. In range‐edge populations of plants, the scarcity of suitable habitat may be reflected in small population sizes which may result in increased self‐pollination and/or inbreeding and an increase in the incidence of clonal reproduction. These factors may result in a decrease in levels of genetic diversity and a loss of potential adaptive variation that may compromise species’ ability to cope with changes in their environment, an issue that is particularly relevant today with the current concern surrounding global climate change and its effect on species’ distributional ranges. In the present study, we have compared the levels of clonal reproduction in the one‐sided wintergreen Orthilia secunda (L.) House in (1) populations from its main continuous distribution range, (2) populations occurring on the limits of the continuous range, and (3) peripheral populations outwith the species’ continuous distribution range. Range‐edge populations in Scotland and Sweden displayed significantly lower genotypic richness and diversity than those from the main area of the species’ distribution in these countries. Populations from Ireland, which occur in the temperate zone rather than the boreal conditions that are the preferred habitat for the species, and which represent relict populations left over from cooler periods in the Earth's history, displayed no within‐population genetic diversity, suggesting a complete lack of sexual reproduction. Furthermore, the genetic distinctiveness of the Irish populations, which contained alleles not found in either the Scottish or the Swedish populations, highlights the value of ‘trailing edge’ populations and supports the concept of ‘parochial conservation’, namely the conservation of species that are locally rare but globally common.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".