MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967280942 · doi:10.1038/s41437-019-0257-4

The population genetics of crypsis in vertebrates: recent insights from mice, hares, and lizards

2019· review· en· W2967280942 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca B. Harris, Kristen K. Irwin, Matthew R. Jones, Stefan Laurent, Rowan D. H. Barrett, Michael W. Nachman, Jeffrey M. Good, Catherine R. Linnen, Jeffrey D. Jensen, Susanne P. Pfeifer

Bibliographic record

VenueHeredity · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCrypsisBiologyEvolutionary biologyMelanismPopulation geneticsPopulationZoologyGeneticsEcologyPredationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By combining well-established population genetic theory with high-throughput sequencing data from natural populations, major strides have recently been made in understanding how, why, and when vertebrate populations evolve crypsis. Here, we focus on background matching, a particular facet of crypsis that involves the ability of an organism to conceal itself through matching its color to the surrounding environment. While interesting in and of itself, the study of this phenotype has also provided fruitful population genetic insights into the interplay of strong positive selection with other evolutionary processes. Specifically, and predicated upon the findings of previous candidate gene association studies, a primary focus of this recent literature involves the realization that the inference of selection from DNA sequence data first requires a robust model of population demography in order to identify genomic regions which do not conform to neutral expectations. Moreover, these demographic estimates provide crucial information about the origin and timing of the onset of selective pressures associated with, for example, the colonization of a novel environment. Furthermore, such inference has revealed crypsis to be a particularly useful phenotype for investigating the interplay of migration and selection-with examples of gene flow constraining rates of adaptation, or alternatively providing the genetic variants that may ultimately sweep through the population. Here, we evaluate the underlying evidence, review the strengths and weaknesses of the many population genetic methodologies used in these studies, and discuss how these insights have aided our general understanding of the evolutionary process.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207