MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224246100 · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13707

Genomic reaction norms inform predictions of plastic and adaptive responses to climate change

2022· review· en· W4224246100 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebekah A. Oomen, Jeffrey A. Hutchings

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsPhenotypic plasticityBiologyAdaptation (eye)Local adaptationContext (archaeology)GenomicsEvolutionary biologyClimate changeEnvironmental changeEcologyGeneticsGeneGenomePopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genomic reaction norms represent the range of gene expression phenotypes (usually mRNA transcript levels) expressed by a genotype along an environmental gradient. Reaction norms derived from common-garden experiments are powerful approaches for disentangling plastic and adaptive responses to environmental change in natural populations. By treating gene expression as a phenotype in itself, genomic reaction norms represent invaluable tools for exploring causal mechanisms underlying organismal responses to climate change across multiple levels of biodiversity. Our goal is to provide the context, framework and motivation for applying genomic reaction norms to study the responses of natural populations to climate change. Here, we describe the utility of integrating genomics with common-garden-gradient experiments under a reaction norm analytical framework to answer fundamental questions about phenotypic plasticity, local adaptation, their interaction (i.e. genetic variation in plasticity) and future adaptive potential. An experimental and analytical framework for constructing and analysing genomic reaction norms is presented within the context of polygenic climate change responses of structured populations with gene flow. Intended for a broad eco-evo readership, we first briefly review adaptation with gene flow and the importance of understanding the genomic basis and spatial scale of adaptation for conservation and management of structured populations under anthropogenic change. Then, within a high-dimensional reaction norm framework, we illustrate how to distinguish plastic, differentially expressed (difference in reaction norm intercepts) and differentially plastic (difference in reaction norm slopes) genes, highlighting the areas of opportunity for applying these concepts. We conclude by discussing how genomic reaction norms can be incorporated into a holistic framework to understand the eco-evolutionary dynamics of climate change responses from molecules to ecosystems. We aim to inspire researchers to integrate gene expression measurements into common-garden experimental designs to investigate the genomics of climate change responses as sequencing costs become increasingly accessible.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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