MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953306896 · doi:10.1111/oik.04618

Simultaneous evolution of multiple dispersal components and kernel

2017· article· en· W2953306896 on OpenAlexaff
Sudipta Tung, Abhishek Mishra, P. M. Shreenidhi, Mohammed Aamir Sadiq, Sripad Joshi, V. R. Shree Sruti, Sutirth Dey

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiological dispersalBiologyFragmentation (computing)HabitatEcologyHabitat fragmentationDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global climate is changing rapidly and is accompanied by large‐scale fragmentation and destruction of habitats. Since dispersal is the first line of defense for mobile organisms to cope with such adversities in their environment, it is important to understand the causes and consequences of evolution of dispersal. Although dispersal is a complex phenomenon involving multiple dispersal‐components like propensity (tendency to leave the natal patch) and ability (to travel long distances), the relationship between these traits is not always straight‐forward, it is not clear whether these traits can evolve simultaneously or not, and how their interactions affect the overall dispersal profile. To investigate these issues, we subjected four large (n ∼ 2400) outbred populations of Drosophila melanogaster to artificial selection for increased dispersal, in a setup that mimicked increasing habitat fragmentation over 33 generations. The propensity and ability of the selected populations were significantly greater than the non‐selected controls and the difference persisted even in the absence of proximate drivers for dispersal. The dispersal kernel evolved to have significantly greater standard deviation and reduced values of skew and kurtosis, which ultimately translated into the evolution of a greater frequency of long‐distance dispersers (LDDs). We also found that although sex‐biased dispersal exists in D. melanogaster , its expression can vary depending on which dispersal component is being measured and the environmental condition under which dispersal takes place. Interestingly though, there was no difference between the two sexes in terms of dispersal evolution. We discuss possible reasons for why some of our results do not agree with previous laboratory and field studies. The rapid evolution of multiple components of dispersal and the kernel, expressed even in the absence of stress, indicates that dispersal evolution cannot be ignored while investigating eco‐evolutionary phenomena like speed of range expansion, disease spread, evolution of invasive species and destabilization of metapopulation dynamics.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207