The Genetic Diversity of Triploid <i>Celtis pumila</i> and its Diploid Relatives <i>C. occidentalis</i> and <i>C. laevigata</i> (Cannabaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract— The genus Celtis in eastern North America shows puzzling patterns of variation. While three species are generally recognized, many authors have suggested hybridization may be blurring the boundaries among them. Suspected hybridization between C. occidentalis and C. pumila has hampered conservation planning for the latter, which is a Threatened species in Canada. Using microsatellite markers and flow cytometry, we assessed the relationship between genetic diversity, ploidy, and morphology in this group. We confirmed the presence of two diploid species, C. occidentalis and C. laevigata, and that they do hybridize where they co-occur in southern Missouri and Illinois. We found two triploid genetic groups. These groups had distinct geographic ranges, but were morphologically very similar, corresponding to C. pumila. Furthermore, the triploid groups were characterized by a small number of heterozygous multi-locus genotypes. A single genotype dominated populations across Ontario, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, indicating apomictic reproduction is common in these groups. While the triploid clusters were distinct from each other, they did have strong associations with sympatric diploid species, and also with the western triploid species C. reticulata. However, we found no evidence of hybridization or gene flow between diploid C. occidentalis and triploid C. pumila. This removes hybridization and introgression as a complicating issue for conservation management. The intermediate forms observed are a demonstration of remarkable phenotypic plasticity, with the same triploid genotype variously presenting as dwarf shrubs in xeric, exposed sites, and subcanopy trees in mesic forests.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".