MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SUBSPECIFIC DIFFERENTIATION AND CONSERVATION OF SONG SPARROWS (MELOSPIZA MELODIA) IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION INFERRED BY MICROSATELLITE LOCI ANALYSIS

2002· article· en· W2172621575 on OpenAlexaff
Yvonne L. Chan, Peter Arcese

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Auk · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayMicrosatelliteGeographySubspeciesBiologyZoologyEcologyEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGeneArchaeologyAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined genetic population structure of five putative subspecies of Song Sparrows (Melospiza melodia) in the San Francisco Bay region (M. m. samuelis, M. m. maxillaris, M. m. pusillula, M. m. gouldii, and M. m. heermanni) at nine microsatellite loci to assist the development of Song Sparrow conservation and management strategies. We sampled nine populations from five putative subspecies and found low estimates of differentiation between populations within subspecies and between. Despite low estimates of divergence, genetic structure at the subspecies level was indicated by the larger amount of variance accounted for by subspecies than populations. We propose that a management unit encompassing the range of M. m. pusillula be given priority for conservation on the basis of the extent of genetic divergence shown by Cavalli-Sforza and Edward's chord distance, and the topology of an unweighted pair group cluster analysis supported by 100% of bootstrap replicates across loci. Although M. m. samuelis and M. m. maxillaris appear undifferentiated from M. m. heermanni, it remains possible that adaptive differences between those types were not identified with neutral loci.

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 score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations47
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AukSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207