MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392862575 · doi:10.1093/evolut/qpae037

Phenotypic lags influence rapid evolution throughout a drought cycle

2024· article· en· W4392862575 on OpenAlexafffund
Haley A. Branch, Daniel N. Anstett, Amy L. Angert

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam TrustsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyPhenotypeEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate anomalies are increasing and posing strong selection, which can lead to rapid evolution. This is occurring on a backdrop of interannual variability that might weaken or even reverse selection. However, the effect of interannual climatic variability on rapid evolution is rarely considered. We study the climatic differences that contribute to rapid evolution throughout a 7-year period, encompassing a severe drought across 12 populations of Mimulus cardinalis (scarlet monkeyflower). Plants were grown in a common greenhouse environment under wet and dry treatments, where specific leaf area and date of flowering were measured. We examine the association between trait values and different climate metrics at different time periods, including the collection year, prior years, and cumulative metrics across sequential years. Of the climatic variables we assessed, we find that anomalies in mean annual precipitation best describe trait differences over our study period. Past climates, of 1-2 years prior, are often related to trait values in a conflicting direction to collection-year climate. Uncovering these complex climatic impacts on evolution is critical to better predict and interpret the impacts of climate 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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.010

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.226 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207