MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294711748 · doi:10.1007/s10592-016-0828-3

Isolation by distance and non-identical patterns of gene flow within two river populations of the freshwater fish Rutilus rutilus (L. 1758)

2016· article· en· W2294711748 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Crookes, Paul W. Shaw

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Genetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersCentre for Ecology and HydrologyNatural Environment Research Council
KeywordsRutilusBiological dispersalBiologyEcologyPopulationBiodiversityTributaryRange (aeronautics)FisheryGeographyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial distribution of organisms is maintained by a combination of in situ reproduction and dispersal of conspecifics from elsewhere within its habitable range. The determination of dispersal origin and sub-population connectivity has a vital role to play in forming effective management policies. The common roach ( Rutilus rutilus ) is an important component of the economically and socially valuable recreational fishery and represents a well-studied member of the Cyprinidae. Microsatellite allele data were used to investigate hypothetically variant levels of microevolutionary structuring and isolation-by-distance (IBD) in in the Rivers Stour and Thames. A strong signal of IBD was found in the Stour, probably due to the limited capacity for unrestricted bidirectional dispersal in this river compared with the Thames. A weak inference of IBD in the Thames is likely erroneous and effected by a strong localised genetic signal from a recent stocking event. Whilst we found significantly genetically divergent upstream areas in the River Stour, a strong signal of IBD remained when the headwater sub-population was removed, suggesting that that the signal is not biased by non-equilibrium conditions in upstream reaches. We discuss these results with reference to the management of aquatic bioresources and emphasise the idiosyncrasy that aquatic biota and hydrological complexity may imprint upon patterns of biodiversity within any given system.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation GeneticsSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207