MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297174486 · doi:10.1002/ajb2.16061

Environmental contributions to the evolution of trait differences in <i>Geum triflorum</i> : Implications for restoration

2022· article· en· W4297174486 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kate Volk, Joseph Braasch, Marissa Ahlering, Jill A. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchNature Conservancy of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyTraitEvolutionary biologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREMISE: How the environment influences the distribution of trait variation across a species' range has important implications for seed transfer during restoration. Evolution across environments could influence fitness when individuals are transferred into new environments. Here, we evaluate the role the environment has had on the distribution of genetic variance for traits important to adaptation. METHODS: In a common garden experiment, we quantified trait differentiation for populations of Geum triflorum sourced from three distinct ecoregions and evaluated the ability of climate to predict trait variation. Populations were sourced from the Manitoba and Great Lake alvar ecoregions that experience predictable extremes in seasonal water availability and the prairie ecoregion which exhibits unpredictable changes in water availability. RESULTS: Plants sourced from alvar ecoregions exhibited smaller but more stomata and greater intrinsic water-use efficiency relative to prairie plant populations, supporting the evolution of ecotypic differences. Estimates of standing genetic variance and heritable genetic variation for quantitative traits suggest alvar populations have greater adaptive potential. However, low evolvability suggests all populations likely have limited capacity to evolve in response to environmental change. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of the environment in influencing the evolution and distribution of genetic differences across populations used as seed sources for restoration. Additionally, these data may inform recommendations for seed transfer across novel environments and our expectations of populations' adaptive potential.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207