ESTIMATING GENETIC CORRELATIONS FROM MEASUREMENTS OF FIELD-CAUGHT WATERSTRIDERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lynch (1999) proposed a method for estimation of genetic correlations from phenotypic measurements of individuals for which no pedigree information is available. This method assumes that shared environmental effects do not contribute to the similarity of relatives, and it is expected to perform best when sample sizes are large, many individuals in the sample are paired with close relatives, and heritability of the traits is high. We tested the practicality of this method for field biologists by using it to estimate genetic correlations from measurements of field-caught waterstriders (Aquarius remigis). Results for sample sizes of less than 100 pairs were often unstable or undefined, and even with more than 500 pairs only half of those correlations that had been found to be significant in standard laboratory experiments were statistically significant in this study. Statistically removing the influence of environmental effects (shared between relatives) weakened the estimates, possibly by removing some of the genetic similarity between relatives. However, the method did generate statistically significant estimates for some genetic correlations. Lynch (1999) anticipated the problems found, and proposed another method that uses estimates of relatedness between members of pairs (from molecular marker data) to improve the estimates of genetic correlations, but that approach has yet to be tested in the field.Corresponding Editor: K. Ross
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".