The geographic basis for population structure in Fraser River chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We surveyed variation at 13 microsatellite loci in approximately 7400 chinook salmon sampled from 52 spawning sites in the Fraser River drainage during 1988–98 to examine the spatial and temporal basis of population structure in the watershed. Genetically discrete chinook salmon populations were associated with almost all spawning sites, although gene flow within some tributaries prevented or limited differentiation among spawning groups. The mean FST value over 52 samples and 13 loci surveyed was 0.039. Geographic structuring of populations was apparent: distinct groups were identified in the upper, middle, and lower Fraser River regions, and the north, south, and lower Thompson River regions. The geographically and temporally isolated Birkenhead River population of the lower Fraser region was sufficiently genetically distinctive to be treated as a separate region in a hierarchial analysis of gene diversity. Approximately 95% of genetic variation was contained within populations, and the remainder was accounted for by differentiation among regions (3.1%), among populations within regions (1.3%), and among years within populations (0.5%).Analysis of allelic diversity and private alleles did not support the suggestion that genetically distinctive populations of chinook salmon in the south Thompson were the result of postglacial hybridization of ocean-type and stream-type chinook in the Fraser River drainage. However, the relatively small amount of differentiation among Fraser River chinook salmon populations supports the suggestion that gene flow among genetically distinct groups of postglacial colonizing groups of chinook salmon has occurred, possibly prior to colonization of the Fraser River drainage.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".