MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521460772 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2016.1467

Demographic mechanisms underpinning genetic assimilation of remnant groups of a large carnivore

2016· article· en· W2521460772 on OpenAlexaff
Nate L. Mikle, Tabitha A. Graves, Ryan P. Kovach, Katherine C. Kendall, Amy C. Macleod

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDivision of Environmental Biology
KeywordsEcologyBiological dispersalGenetic diversityUrsusRange (aeronautics)PopulationBiologyInbreedingCarnivoreGeographyGenetic structureDemographyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current range expansions of large terrestrial carnivores are occurring following human-induced range contraction. Contractions are often incomplete, leaving small remnant groups in refugia throughout the former range. Little is known about the underlying ecological and evolutionary processes that influence how remnant groups are affected during range expansion. We used data from a spatially explicit, long-term genetic sampling effort of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE), USA, to identify the demographic processes underlying spatial and temporal patterns of genetic diversity. We conducted parentage analysis to evaluate how reproductive success and dispersal contribute to spatio-temporal patterns of genetic diversity in remnant groups of grizzly bears existing in the southwestern (SW), southeastern (SE) and east-central (EC) regions of the NCDE. A few reproductively dominant individuals and local inbreeding caused low genetic diversity in peripheral regions that may have persisted for multiple generations before eroding rapidly (approx. one generation) during population expansion. Our results highlight that individual-level genetic and reproductive dynamics play critical roles during genetic assimilation, and show that spatial patterns of genetic diversity on the leading edge of an expansion may result from historical demographic patterns that are highly ephemeral.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations44
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207