MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157050530 · doi:10.1139/b05-085

Spatial genetic and clonal structure in<i>Maianthemum dilatatum</i>as defined by AFLP markers

2005· article· en· W2157050530 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Amy Wilson, Bart Kamp, Carol Ritland

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGene flowAmplified fragment length polymorphismGenetic structureGenetic variationSpatial heterogeneityEvolutionary biologyGeneGeneticsEcologyGenetic diversityPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) were used to investigate the clonal and spatial genetic structure of Maianthemum dilatatum (A. Wood) Nels. & J.F. Macbr. (Convallariaceae), a clonal rhizomatous herb, which can form large patches of continuous cover. Within a subpopulation covering approximately 3 ha, all patches (n = 21) were mapped and sampled. Within these patches, 116 ramets were sampled and assigned to 74 putative genets. Small patches appeared to be single genets while larger patches were genetically heterogeneous and only moderately differentiated (ΦST= 0.291, p = 0.001). Less intense sampling in other populations produced similar results in that single genet populations were not found. Evidence of genet natality was present with the detection of five yearlings within a single season. Spatial autocorrelation measures detected spatial genetic structure attributable to both clonal growth and gene flow processes. It was concluded that within M. dilatatum populations, clonality is a significant factor, but the spatial structuring of genetic variation suggests that both low levels of restricted gene flow and repeated recruitment of genets occur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207