Wild GWAS—association mapping in natural populations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing affordability of sequencing and genotyping technologies has transformed the field of molecular ecology in recent decades. By correlating marker variants with trait variation using association analysis, large-scale genotyping and phenotyping of individuals from wild populations has enabled the identification of genomic regions that contribute to phenotypic differences among individuals. Such "gene mapping" studies are enabling us to better predict evolutionary potential and the ability of populations to adapt to challenges, such as changing environment. These studies are also allowing us to gain insight into the evolutionary processes maintaining variation in natural populations, to better understand genotype-by-environment and epistatic interactions and to track the dynamics of allele frequency change at loci contributing to traits under selection. Gene mapping in the wild using genomewide association scans (GWAS) do, however, come with a number of methodological challenges, not least the population structure in space and time inherent to natural populations. We here provide an overview of these challenges, summarize the exciting methodological advances and applications of association mapping in natural populations reported in this special issue and provide some guidelines for future "wild GWAS" research.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it