Geographic isolation and larval dispersal shape seascape genetic patterns differently according to spatial scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Genetic variation, as a basis of evolutionary change, allows species to adapt and persist in different climates and environments. Yet, a comprehensive assessment of the drivers of genetic variation at different spatial scales is still missing in marine ecosystems. Here, we investigated the influence of environment, geographic isolation, and larval dispersal on the variation in allele frequencies, using an extensive spatial sampling (47 locations) of the striped red mullet (Mullus surmuletus) in the Mediterranean Sea. Univariate multiple regressions were used to test the influence of environment (salinity and temperature), geographic isolation, and larval dispersal on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) allele frequencies. We used Moran's eigenvector maps (db‐MEMs) and asymmetric eigenvector maps (AEMs) to decompose geographic and dispersal distances in predictors representing different spatial scales. We found that salinity and temperature had only a weak effect on the variation in allele frequencies. Our results revealed the predominance of geographic isolation to explain variation in allele frequencies at large spatial scale (>1,000 km), while larval dispersal was the major predictor at smaller spatial scale (<1,000 km). Our findings stress the importance of including spatial scales to understand the drivers of spatial genetic variation. We suggest that larval dispersal allows to maintain gene flows at small to intermediate scale, while at broad scale, genetic variation may be mostly shaped by adult mobility, demographic history, or multigenerational stepping‐stone dispersal. These findings bring out important spatial scale considerations to account for in the design of a protected area network that would efficiently enhance protection and persistence capacity of marine 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".