MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082018815 · doi:10.1002/ece3.6688

Examining the molecular mechanisms contributing to the success of an invasive species across different ecosystems

2020· article· en· W3082018815 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah K. Lamar, Ian Beddows, Charlyn Partridge

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEnvironmental Protection AgencyThermo Fisher Scientific
KeywordsBiologyEcosystemAbiotic componentEcologyHabitatAbiotic stressGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Invasive species provide an opportune system to investigate how populations respond to new environments. Baby's breath ( Gypsophila paniculata ) was introduced to North America in the 1800s and has since spread throughout the United States and western Canada. We used an RNA‐seq approach to explore how molecular processes contribute to the success of invasive populations with similar genetic backgrounds across distinct habitats. Transcription profiles were constructed from seedlings collected from a sand dune ecosystem in Petoskey, MI (PSMI), and a sagebrush ecosystem in Chelan, WA (CHWA). We assessed differential gene expression and identified SNPs within differentially expressed genes. We identified 1,146 differentially expressed transcripts across all sampled tissues between the two populations. GO processes enriched in PSMI were associated with nutrient starvation, while enriched processes in CHWA were associated with abiotic stress. Only 7.4% of the differentially expressed transcripts contained SNPs differing in allele frequencies of at least 0.5 between populations. Common garden studies found the two populations differed in germination rate and seedling emergence success. Our results suggest the success of G. paniculata in these two environments is likely due to plasticity in specific molecular processes responding to different environmental conditions, although some genetic divergence may be contributing to these differences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207