The eastern migratory caribou: the role of genetic introgression in ecotype evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the evolutionary history of contemporary animal groups is essential for conservation and management of endangered species like caribou (Rangifer tarandus). In central Canada, the ranges of two caribou subspecies (barren-ground/woodland caribou) and two woodland caribou ecotypes (boreal/eastern migratory) overlap. Our objectives were to reconstruct the evolutionary history of the eastern migratory ecotype and to assess the potential role of introgression in ecotype evolution. STRUCTURE analyses identified five higher order groups (i.e. three boreal caribou populations, eastern migratory ecotype and barren-ground). The evolutionary history of the eastern migratory ecotype was best explained by an early genetic introgression from barren-ground into a woodland caribou lineage during the Late Pleistocene and subsequent divergence of the eastern migratory ecotype during the Holocene. These results are consistent with the retreat of the Laurentide ice sheet and the colonization of the Hudson Bay coastal areas subsequent to the establishment of forest tundra vegetation approximately 7000 years ago. This historical reconstruction of the eastern migratory ecotype further supports its current classification as a conservation unit, specifically a Designatable Unit, under Canada's Species at Risk Act. These findings have implications for other sub-specific contact zones for caribou and other North American species in conservation unit delineation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".