MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473732820 · doi:10.1071/pc14934

Population genetic structure of the goby Stiphodon rutilaureus (Gobiidae) in the New Georgia Group, Solomon Islands

2016· article· en· W2473732820 on OpenAlexaff
David Boseto, Sharon J. Furiness Magnuson, Frank Pezold

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Conservation Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsEmergent BioSolutions (Canada)
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyTexas A and M University-Corpus ChristiNational Geographic Society
KeywordsGobyBiologyArchipelagoMicrosatelliteGenetic structurePopulationZoologyEcologyFisheryGeographyGenetic variationFish <Actinopterygii>DemographyGeneticsGeneSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we use eight microsatellite loci and a mitochondrial locus to investigate the population structure of the amphidromous goby species Stiphodon rutilaureus in the New Georgia Group, Solomon Islands. In total, 206 specimens were collected between June 2010 and August of 2012 on three different trips. The AMOVA results from both types of loci reveal that &amp;gt;95% of variation is contained within populations. Pairwise comparisons reveal non-significant differences between three different regions for the mitochondrial analysis but a significant difference between the west and central regions for the microsatellites. The findings in this study concur with results from previous studies, indicating low or no population structure among populations of amphidromous sicydiine goby species on different islands within an archipelago. This study can provide suggestions for management and conservation of fragile aquatic species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific Conservation BiologySame topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207