MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044249931 · doi:10.1111/jbi.13935

Population dynamics and range shifts of moose (<i>Alces alces</i>) during the Late Quaternary

2020· article· en· W3044249931 on OpenAlexaff
Meirav Meiri, Adrian M. Lister, П. А. Косинцев, Grant D. Zazula, Ian Barnes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biogeography · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of NatureYukon Department of Tourism and Culture
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsHolarcticBeringiaRange (aeronautics)Last Glacial MaximumGlacial periodQuaternaryPleistocenePopulationMegafaunaEcologyGeographyBefore PresentRadiocarbon datingPaleontologyGeologyHoloceneArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Late Quaternary climate oscillations had major impacts on species distributions and abundances across the northern Holarctic. While many large mammals in this region went extinct towards the end of the Quaternary, some species survived and flourished. Here, we examine population dynamics and range shifts of one of the most widely distributed of these, the moose ( Alces alces ). Location Northern Holarctic. Taxon Moose ( A. alces ). Methods We collected samples of modern and ancient moose from across their present and former range. We assessed their phylogeographical relations using part of the mitochondrial DNA in conjunction with radiocarbon dating to investigate the history of A. alces during the last glacial. Results This species has a relatively shallow history, with the most recent common ancestor estimated at ca. 150–50 kyr. Ancient samples corroborate that its region of greatest diversity is in east Asia, supporting proposals that this is the region of origin of all extant moose. Both eastern and western haplogroups occur in the Ural Mountains during the last glacial period, implying a broader contact zone than previously proposed. It seems that this species went extinct over much of its northern range during the last glacial maximum (LGM) and recolonized the region with climate warming beginning around 15,000 yr bp . The post‐LGM expansion included a movement from northeast Siberia to North America via Beringia, although the northeast Siberian source population is not the one currently occupying that area. Main conclusions Moose are a relatively recently evolved species but have had a dynamic history. As a large‐bodied subarctic browsing species, they were seemingly confined to refugia during full‐glacial periods and expanded their range northwards when the boreal forest returned after the LGM. The main modern phylogeographical division is ancient, though its boundary has not remained constant. Moose population expansion into America was roughly synchronous with human and red deer expansion.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiogeographySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207