A microsatellite analysis of the western Canadian mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) epidemic: phylogeography and long distance dispersal patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mountain pine beetle (MPB) is an eruptive insect that is currently causing an outbreak of record size in Western Canada. A lack of long distance MPB dispersal data has limited our understanding of and ability to manage MPB epidemics. My goal was to determine the MPBs Western Canadian population structure, upon which dispersal patterns may be superimposed. I analyzed MPBs from 35 infested lodgepole pine stands at six microsatellite loci. The MPB exhibited strong and significant Western Canadian population structure. This population structure was incongruent with the structure of its primary symbiont, O. clavigerum, but congruent with the structure of its primary host, P. contorta. Novel fungal selection pressures have probably caused the discrepancy in beetle/fungus phylogeography. A result of Western Canadian MPB population structure alternately contrasts and supports population structure previously reported for Scolytids, including MPBs. The partitioning of MPB population structure into a Northern and Southern group is most likely the result of postglacial recolonization and differences in MPB population dynamics. Primarily using my genetic data, I inferred the historical movement patterns of the MPB in Western Canada. I found no evidence that the epidemic spread from an epicenter in Tweedsmuir Provincial Park. My data support multiple sources for the current epidemic I suggest that regional population expansions have caused the rapid escalation in the severity of the current epidemic. MPB movement patterns and atmospheric wind data were concordant winds in Western Canada are predominantly westerly or southwesterly, which was the predominant direction of inferred movements among MPB populations. In contrast, current MPB population structure best fits a 30-year climatic suitability distribution for a historical (1921-1950) as opposed to the most current (1971-2000) period. The population genetics of long distance MPB dispersal, an evolutionary theory for MPB population dynamics, and MPB '~range expans
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".