MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378800875 · doi:10.1002/ppp3.10387

Is hybridisation with non‐native congeneric species a threat to the UK native bluebell <scp><i>Hyacinthoides non‐scripta</i></scp>?

2023· article· en· W4378800875 on OpenAlexafffund
Markus Ruhsam, D. D. Kohn, Jeannine Marquardt, Andrew R. Leitch, Harald Schneider, Johannes Vogel, Spencer C. H. Barrett, Philip E. Hulme, J. Squirrell, Peter M. Hollingsworth

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants People Planet · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaScottish GovernmentRural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division
KeywordsIntroduced speciesExtinction (optical mineralogy)TaxonBiologyNative americanZoologyEcologyGenealogyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Societal Impact Statement Hybridisation is an important evolutionary force in plants, but it can potentially lead to genetic swamping and extinction of one or both parental species. The threat of extinction is of particular concern if hybridisation occurs between native and introduced species, especially when the native is of national importance. The widespread occurrence of non‐native bluebells in the United Kingdom has raised concerns that the iconic native bluebell could be at risk due to extinction by hybridisation from introduced non‐native bluebells. This study determines the taxonomic identity of non‐natives and investigates the amount of hybridisation occurring in natural and semi‐natural UK bluebell populations. Summary The widespread occurrence of a non‐native bluebell taxon in the UK has raised concerns that the iconic native bluebell H. non‐scripta (Asparagaceae) could be at risk due to extinction by hybridisation from introduced non‐native congeners. Understanding the nature of this threat requires quantification of the extent of hybridisation between the native and non‐native taxa. An additional complication is taxonomic uncertainty regarding the identity of the non‐native bluebells in the United Kingdom that are colloquially referred to as the ‘Spanish’ bluebell ( H. hispanica ). We collected 501 bluebell samples from 56 populations in the United Kingdom ( H. non‐scripta and non‐natives) and the Iberian Peninsula ( H. hispanica ). The samples were assayed for variation at 1871 nuclear and 17 plastid single nucleotide polymorphisms. Our genetic analyses demonstrated that non‐native bluebells in the United Kingdom are not H. hispanica but the hybrid between H. hispanica and H. non‐scripta . Moreover, they supported the hypothesis that Portugal is the country of origin of the first H. hispanica introductions to the United Kingdom. The frequency of hybrids was about 16%. Backcrosses between the (hybrid) non‐native bluebell and the native H. non‐scripta were primarily found in public parks. Of the sampled individuals for H. non‐scripta from natural habitats, only 2% showed evidence of introgression. Although hybridisation might be frequent in locations where non‐native bluebells have been introduced, we found no evidence of large‐scale introgression in natural H. non‐scripta populations. Therefore, our results do not support concerns of an ‘extinction by hybridisation’ scenario.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlants People PlanetSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207