Adaptation and exogenous selection in a<i><scp>P</scp>icea glauca</i>×<i><scp>P</scp>icea engelmannii</i>hybrid zone: implications for forest management under climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nature of selection responsible for the maintenance of the economically and ecologically important Picea glauca × Picea engelmannii hybrid zone was investigated. Genomic, phenotypic and climatic data were used to test assumptions of hybrid zone maintenance and to model future scenarios under climate change. Genome-wide estimates of admixture based on a panel of 86 candidate gene single nucleotide polymorphisms were combined with long-term quantitative data on growth and survival (over 20 yr), as well as one-time assessments of bud burst and bud set phenology, and cold hardiness traits. A total of 15,498 individuals were phenotyped for growth and survival. Our results suggest that the P. glauca × P. engelmannii hybrid zone is maintained by local adaptation to growing season length and snowpack (exogenous selection). Hybrids appeared to be fitter than pure species in intermediate environments, which fits expectations of the bounded hybrid superiority model of hybrid zone maintenance. Adaptive introgression from parental species has probably contributed to increased hybrid fitness in intermediate habitats. While P. engelmannii ancestry is higher than P. glauca ancestry in hybrid populations, on average, selective breeding in managed hybrid populations is shifting genomic composition towards P. glauca, potentially pre-adapting managed populations to warmer climates.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".