Cryptic microgeographic variation in responses of larval Atlantic cod to warmer temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although temperature is known to drive species dynamics and distributions, our understanding of the extent to which thermal plasticity varies within species is poor. Differences in plasticity can arise through local adaptation to heterogeneous environments, hybridization, and the release of cryptic genetic variation in novel environments. Here, wild Atlantic cod ( Gadus morhua ) from contrasting environments inside and outside of a fjord system in southern Norway spawned freely in a semi-natural laboratory environment, generating pure crosses and reciprocal hybrids. A common-garden rearing experiment of the larvae at 6°C, 9.5°C, and 13°C revealed cryptic genetic variation in thermal responses of growth and survival at warmer temperatures. Variation in growth plasticity was greatest from 9.5°C to 13°C, the latter of which exceeds temperatures currently typical of larvae in their native environments. In contrast to our prediction of intermediate hybrid responses consistent with additive genetic effects, one reciprocal hybrid cross showed a 4% increase in size at the highest temperature, whereas most crosses exhibited 4-12% reductions in size. All crosses experienced severe (76-93%) reductions in survival from 9.5°C to 13°C. Variation in survival plasticity suggests a genetically variable basis for the severity with which survival declines with increasing temperature and the potential for an adaptive response to warming. Notably, we demonstrate the potential for hybridization between coexisting ‘fjord’ and ‘North Sea’ ecotypes that naturally inhabit the inner and outer fjord environments at contrasting frequencies. Yet, ecotype explained a minor (3-10%) component of growth reaction norm variation, suggesting it is insufficient for describing important biological variation. Current broad-scale management and lack of coastal monitoring impede the development of strategies to maintain the potential for adaptation to warming temperatures in systems with such phenotypic complexity resulting from cryptic genetic variation, coexisting ecotypes, and gene flow.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".