MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303982969 · doi:10.1111/mec.16725

Evolutionary legacy of the extirpated red wolf clings to life in gulf‐coast canids

2022· article· en· W4303982969 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benjamin N. Sacks

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanisPopulationRange (aeronautics)EcologyDemiseBiologyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before Europeans colonized North America, a uniquely American wolf roamed the eastern forests of southern Canada to Florida and west to the Great Plains. Known today as "red wolf" (Canis rufus) in the south and "eastern wolf" (Canis lycaon) in the north, evidence suggests that these indigenous forest wolves shared a common evolutionary history until only a few centuries ago when they were extirpated from the intervening majority of their historical range. While the eastern wolf persists today primarily as a small population in Algonquin Provincial Park, Canada, the red wolf was ostensibly driven from its last stronghold in gulf-coastal Louisiana and Texas by 1980. The last-known red wolves were taken captive for propagation and reintroduction. Today, the red wolf exists as ~250 descendants of 12 founders and are distributed among 42 captive breeding facilities and one reintroduced population in coastal North Carolina. As red and eastern wolves declined in the 20th century, coyotes expanded from the west into the eastern forests, replacing them. Along with human persecution, coyote hybridization has been blamed for the late 20th century demise of the red wolf. However, rather than helping to drive the red wolf to extinction, coyote hybridization may have instead helped to preserve it. In this issue of Molecular Ecology, vonHoldt and colleagues provide the most comprehensive description yet of the substantial quantity and distribution of red wolf ancestry sequestered in southeastern coyote populations. They find the highest frequency of red wolf genes in coyotes from the gulf-coastal sites where the last known wild red wolves occurred, but also present evidence for a high prevalence of red wolf genes in coyotes throughout the southeastern expansion zone. Given the significant reduction in genetic diversity in extant red wolves owing to their late 20th century population bottleneck, this coyote-sequestered reservoir of red wolf genes could prove an important resource for red wolf conservation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207