Using a genetic network to parameterize a landscape resistance surface for fishers, Martes pennanti
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge of dispersal-related gene flow is important for addressing many basic and applied questions in ecology and evolution. We used landscape genetics to understand the recovery of a recently expanded population of fishers (Martes pennanti) in Ontario, Canada. An important focus of landscape genetics is modelling the effects of landscape features on gene flow. Most often resistance surfaces in landscape genetic studies are built a priori based upon nongenetic field data or expert opinion. The resistance surface that best fits genetic data is then selected and interpreted. Given inherent biases in using expert opinion or movement data to model gene flow, we sought an alternative approach. We used estimates of conditional genetic distance derived from a network of genetic connectivity to parameterize landscape resistance and build a final resistance surface based upon information-theoretic model selection and multi-model averaging. We sampled 657 fishers from 31 landscapes, genotyped them at 16 microsatellite loci, and modelled the effects of snow depth, road density, river density, and coniferous forest on gene flow. Our final model suggested that road density, river density, and snow depth impeded gene flow during the fisher population expansion demonstrating that both human impacts and seasonal habitat variation affect gene flow for fishers. Our approach to building landscape genetic resistance surfaces mitigates many of the problems and caveats associated with using either nongenetic field data or expert opinion to derive resistance surfaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".