Genotyping-in-Thousands by sequencing of archival fish scales reveals maintenance of genetic variation following a severe demographic contraction in kokanee salmon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historical DNA analysis of archival samples has added new dimensions to population genetic studies, enabling spatiotemporal approaches for reconstructing population history and informing conservation management. Here we tested the efficacy of Genotyping-in-Thousands by sequencing (GT-seq) for collecting targeted single nucleotide polymorphism genotypic data from archival scale samples, and applied this approach to a study of kokanee salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Kluane National Park and Reserve (KNPR; Yukon, Canada) that underwent a severe 12-year population decline followed by a rapid rebound. We genotyped archival scales sampled pre-crash and contemporary fin clips collected post-crash, revealing high coverage (> 90% average genotyping across all individuals) and low genotyping error (< 0.01% within-libraries, 0.60% among-libraries) despite the relatively poor quality of recovered DNA. We observed slight decreases in expected heterozygosity, allelic diversity, and effective population size post-crash, but none were significant, suggesting genetic diversity was retained despite the severe demographic contraction. Genotypic data also revealed the genetic distinctiveness of a now extirpated population just outside of KNPR, revealing biodiversity loss at the northern edge of the species distribution. More broadly, we demonstrated GT-seq as a valuable tool for collecting genome-wide data from archival samples to address basic questions in ecology and evolution, and inform applied research in wildlife conservation and fisheries management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".