<i>Adcyap1</i> polymorphism covaries with breeding latitude in a Nearctic migratory songbird, the Wilson's warbler (<i>Cardellina pusilla</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the genetic background of complex behavioral traits, showing multigenic control and extensive environmental effects, is a challenging task. Among such traits, migration is known to show a large additive genetic component. Yet, the identification of specific genes or gene regions explaining phenotypic variance in migratory behavior has received less attention. Migration ultimately depends on seasonal cycles, and polymorphism at phenological candidate genes may underlie variation in timing of migration or other aspects of migratory behavior. In this study of a Nearctic-Neotropical migratory songbird, the Wilson's warbler (Cardellina pusilla), we investigated the association between polymorphism at two phenological candidate genes, Clock and Adcyap1, and two aspects of the migratory phenotype, timing of spring migration through a stopover site and inferred latitude of the breeding destination. The breeding destination of migrating individuals was identified using feather deuterium ratio (δ (2)H), which reliably reflects breeding latitude throughout the species' western breeding range. Ninety-eight percent of the individuals were homozygous at Clock, and the rare heterozygotes did not deviate from homozygous migration phenology. Adcyap1 was highly polymorphic, and allele size was not significantly associated with migration date. However, Adcyap1 allele size significantly positively predicted the inferred breeding latitude of males but not of females. Moreover, we found a strong positive association between inferred breeding latitude and Adcyap1 allele size in long-distance migrating birds from the northern sector of the breeding range (western Canada), while this was not the case in short-distance migrating birds from the southern sector of the breeding range (coastal California). Our findings support previous evidence for a role of Adcyap1 in shaping the avian migratory phenotype, while highlighting that patterns of phenological candidate gene-phenotype associations may be complex, significantly varying between geographically distinct populations and even between the sexes.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".