MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spatial structure of lemming populations (<i>Dicrostonyx groenlandicus</i>) fluctuating in density

2001· article· en· W2143154243 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dorothée Ehrich, Per Erik Jorde, Charles J. Krebs, Alice J. Kenney, John E. Stacy, Nils Chr. Stenseth

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiological dispersalBiologyGenetic structurePopulationEcologyGene flowMitochondrial DNAEvolutionary biologyPopulation geneticsGenetic variationGeneticsGeneDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pattern and scale of the genetic structure of populations provides valuable information for the understanding of the spatial ecology of populations, including the spatial aspects of density fluctuations. In the present paper, the genetic structure of periodically fluctuating lemmings (Dicrostonyx groenlandicus) in the Canadian Arctic was analysed using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control region sequences and four nuclear microsatellite loci. Low genetic variability was found in mtDNA, while microsatellite loci were highly variable in all localities, including localities on isolated small islands. For both genetic markers the genetic differentiation was clear among geographical regions but weaker among localities within regions. Such a pattern implies gene flow within regions. Based on theoretical calculations and population census data from a snap-trapping survey, we argue that the observed genetic variability on small islands and the low level of differentiation among these islands cannot be explained without invoking long distance dispersal of lemmings over the sea ice. Such dispersal is unlikely to occur only during population density peaks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations34
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207