MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184394179 · doi:10.1111/jbi.14209

A tale of two conifers: Migration across a dispersal barrier outpaced regional expansion from refugia

2021· article· en· W3184394179 on OpenAlexaff
Matias Fernandez, Feng Sheng Hu, Daniel G. Gavin, Guillaume de Lafontaine, Katy D. Heath

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biogeography · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTsugaBiological dispersalEcologyGlacial periodGeographyRange (aeronautics)Western HemlockLast Glacial MaximumRefugium (fishkeeping)Climate changePopulationBiodiversityHoloceneBiologyHabitatArchaeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Understanding how climate refugia and migration over great distances have facilitated species survival during past climate changes is crucial for evaluating contemporary threats to biodiversity, particularly in the face of dispersal barriers. We address this longstanding question on the refugial origins and post‐glacial development of mesic forests. Location Pacific Northwest, North America. Taxon Mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata). Methods Range‐wide genotyping‐by‐sequencing (ddRADseq) of both study species and a pollen reconstruction of mountain hemlock presence over the last 20,000 years. Results Mountain hemlock occurred in two coastal populations (Oregon and Washington) during the glacial maximum, each of which dispersed to the interior (Idaho and British Columbia) during the Holocene. These populations spread in the direction of dominant winds across a barrier of dry, rain‐shadowed valleys. In contrast, for western redcedar, we infer four disparate refugia during the glacial maximum: southern (California), central (Washington), interior (Idaho), and northern (Haida Gwaii islands). Main conclusions Despite the presence of pre‐dispersed refugial populations, the majority of the redcedar distribution was colonized by the central population. The history for these two key conifers contrast with many recent studies emphasizing the role of cryptic refugia in colonizing modern species ranges.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207