An evolutionarily distinct ringed seal in the Ilulissat Icefjord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Earth's polar regions are low rates of inter- and intraspecific diversification. An extreme mammalian example is the Arctic ringed seal (Pusa hispida hispida), which is assumed to be panmictic across its circumpolar Arctic range. Yet, local Inuit communities in Greenland and Canada recognize several regional variants; a finding supported by scientific studies of body size variation. It is however unclear whether this phenotypic variation reflects plasticity, morphs or distinct ecotypes. Here, we combine genomic, biologging and survey data, to document the existence of a unique ringed seal ecotype in the Ilulissat Icefjord (locally 'Kangia'), Greenland; a UNESCO World Heritage site, which is home to the most productive marine-terminating glacier in the Arctic. Genomic analyses reveal a divergence of Kangia ringed seals from other Arctic ringed seals about 240 kya, followed by secondary contact since the Last Glacial Maximum. Despite ongoing gene flow, multiple genomic regions appear under strong selection in Kangia ringed seals, including candidate genes associated with pelage coloration, growth and osmoregulation, potentially explaining the Kangia seal's phenotypic and behavioural uniqueness. The description of 'hidden' diversity and adaptations in yet another Arctic species merits a reassessment of the evolutionary processes that have shaped Arctic diversity and the traditional view of this region as an evolutionary freezer. Our study highlights the value of indigenous knowledge in guiding science and calls for efforts to identify distinct populations or ecotypes to understand how these might respond differently to environmental change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".