RELATEDNESS AND NESTING DISPERSION WITHIN BREEDING POPULATIONS OF GREATER WHITE-FRONTED GEESE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied patterns of relatedness and nesting dispersion in female Pacific Greater White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons frontalis) in Alaska. Female Greater White-fronted Geese are thought to be strongly philopatric and are often observed nesting in close association with other females. Analysis of the distribution of nests on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta in 1998 indicated that nests were significantly clumped. We tested the hypothesis that females in the same nest cluster would be closely related using estimates of genetic relatedness based on six microsatellite DNA loci. There was no difference in the mean relatedness of females in the same cluster compared to females found in different clusters. However, relatedness among females was negatively correlated with distance between their nests, and geese nesting within 50 m of one another tended to be more closely related than those nesting farther apart. Randomization tests revealed that pairs of related individuals (R > 0.45) were more likely to occur in the same cluster when analyzed at the scale of the entire study site. However, the pattern did not hold when restricted to pairs found within 500 m of each other. Our results indicate that nest clusters are not composed primarily of closely related females, but Greater White-fronted Geese appear to be sufficiently philopatric to promote nonrandom patterns of relatedness at a local scale. Parentesco y Dispersión de Nidos en Poblaciones Reproductivas de Anser albifrons frontalis Resumen. Estudiamos los patrones de parentesco y la dispersión de nidos en hembras de Anser albifrons frontalis en Alaska. Se piensa que las hembras de A. a. frontalis son fuertemente filopátricas y frecuentemente se las observa nidificando asociadas de modo cercano con otras hembras. El análisis de la distribución de los nidos en el Delta de Yukon-Kuskokwim en 1998 indicó que los nidos estuvieron significativamente agrupados. Evaluamos la hipótesis de que las hembras en el mismo grupo de nidos estarían cercanamente emparentadas usando estimaciones de parentesco genético basadas en seis loci de ADN microsatelital. No hubo diferencias en el promedio de parentesco de hembras en el mismo grupo comparado con hembras que se encontraron en grupos diferentes. Sin embargo, el parentesco entre las hembras se correlacionó negativamente con la distancia entre los nidos, y los gansos que se encontraban nidificando a menos de 50 m unos de otros tendieron a estar más cercanamente emparentadas que aquellos nidificando más lejos. Análisis de aleatorización revelaron que parejas de individuos emparentados (R > 0.45) presentaron mayor probabilidad de encontrarse en el mismo grupo cuando los análisis se hicieron a la escala de todo el sitio de estudio. Sin embargo, el patrón no se mantuvo cuando los análisis se restringieron a pares ubicados dentro de 500 m uno de otro. Nuestros resultados indican que los grupos de nidos no están primariamente compuestos por hembras cercanamente emparentadas, pero que A. a. frontalis parece ser suficientemente filopátrica como para promover patrones no aleatorios de parentesco a escala local.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".