MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147208454 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0550

The evolution of migration in a seasonal environment

2010· article· en· W2147208454 on OpenAlexaff
Cortland K. Griswold, Caz M. Taylor, D. Ryan Norris

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)BiologySeasonal breederPopulationAlleleEcologyCooperative breedingGeographyGeneticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the fact that migration occurs in a wide variety of taxa worldwide, little is known about the conditions under which migration is expected to evolve from an ancestral resident population. We develop a model that focuses on ecological factors affecting the evolution of migration in a seasonal environment within a genetically explicit framework. We model the evolution of migration for two common types of migration: 'shared breeding' where migrants share a breeding ground with residents and migrate to a separate non-breeding area, versus 'shared non-breeding', where migrants share a non-breeding ground with residents and migrate to a separate breeding area. Ecologically, migration is more easily established in the shared-breeding case versus the shared-non-breeding case. Genetically, the additive effect of a migratory allele affects its establishment more in the shared-non-breeding case versus the shared-breeding case, whereas the dominance effect of the allele affects its establishment more in the shared-breeding case versus the shared-non-breeding case. Generally, migratory alleles can invade even when residents are competitively superior to migrants during the shared season. Partial migration occurs when the population is polymorphic for migratory and non-migratory alleles, and is dependent upon which season is shared and the additive and dominance behaviour of the migratory allele.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

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

Citations70
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207