Ice‐age persistence and genetic isolation of the disjunct distribution of larch in Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Larix laricina (eastern larch, tamarack) is a transcontinental North American conifer with a prominent disjunction in the Yukon isolating the Alaskan distribution from the rest of its range. We investigate whether in situ persistence during the last glacial maximum (LGM) or long‐distance postglacial migration from south of the ice sheets resulted in the modern‐day Alaskan distribution. We analyzed variation in three chloroplast DNA regions of 840 trees from a total of 69 populations (24 new sampling sites situated on both sides of the Yukon range disjunction pooled with 45 populations from a published source) and conducted ensemble species distribution modeling (SDM) throughout Canada and United States to hindcast the potential range of L. laricina during the LGM. We uncovered the genetic signature of a long‐term isolation of larch populations in Alaska, identifying three endemic chlorotypes and low levels of genetic diversity. Range‐wide analysis across North America revealed the presence of a distinct Alaskan lineage. Postglacial gene flow across the Yukon divide was unidirectional, from Alaska toward previously glaciated Canadian regions, and with no evidence of immigration into Alaska. Hindcast SDM indicates one of the broadest areas of past climate suitability for L. laricina existed in central Alaska, suggesting possible in situ persistence of larch in Alaska during the LGM. Our results provide the first unambiguous evidence for the long‐term isolation of L. laricina in Alaska that extends beyond the last glacial period and into the present interglacial period. The lack of gene flow into Alaska along with the overall probability of larch occurrence in Alaska being currently lower than during the LGM suggests that modern‐day Alaskan larch populations are isolated climate relicts of broader glacial distributions, and so are particularly vulnerable to current warming trends.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".