Evolutionary rescue in vertebrates: evidence, applications and uncertainty
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current rapid rate of human-driven environmental change presents wild populations with novel conditions and stresses. Theory and experimental evidence for evolutionary rescue present a promising case for species facing environmental change persisting via adaptation. Here, we assess the potential for evolutionary rescue in wild vertebrates. Available information on evolutionary rescue was rare and restricted to abundant and highly fecund species that faced severe intentional anthropogenic selective pressures. However, examples from adaptive tracking in common species and genetic rescues in species of conservation concern provide convincing evidence in favour of the mechanisms of evolutionary rescue. We conclude that low population size, long generation times and limited genetic variability will result in evolutionary rescue occurring rarely for endangered species without intervention. Owing to the risks presented by current environmental change and the possibility of evolutionary rescue in nature, we suggest means to study evolutionary rescue by mapping genotype → phenotype → demography → fitness relationships, and priorities for applying evolutionary rescue to wild populations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it