Variation in genomic vulnerability to climate change across temperate populations of eelgrass (<i>Zostera marina</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A global decline in seagrass populations has led to renewed calls for their conservation as important providers of biogenic and foraging habitat, shoreline stabilization and carbon storage. Eelgrass (Zostera marina) occupies the largest geographic range among seagrass species spanning a commensurately broad spectrum of environmental conditions. In Canada, eelgrass is managed as a single phylogroup despite occurring across three oceans and a range of ocean temperatures and salinity gradients. Previous research has focused on applying relatively few markers to reveal population structure of eelgrass, whereas a whole‐genome approach is warranted to investigate cryptic structure among populations inhabiting different ocean basins and localized environmental conditions. We used a pooled whole‐genome re‐sequencing approach to characterize population structure, gene flow and environmental associations of 23 eelgrass populations ranging from the Northeast United States to Atlantic, subarctic and Pacific Canada. We identified over 500,000 SNPs, which when mapped to a chromosome‐level genome assembly revealed six broad clades of eelgrass across the study area, with pairwise FST ranging from 0 among neighbouring populations to 0.54 between Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Genetic diversity was highest in the Pacific and lowest in the subarctic, consistent with colonization of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans from the Pacific less than 300 kya. Using redundancy analyses and two climate change projection scenarios, we found that subarctic populations are predicted to be potentially more vulnerable to climate change through genomic offset predictions. Conservation planning in Canada should thus ensure that representative populations from each identified clade are included within a national network so that latent genetic diversity is protected, and gene flow is maintained. Northern populations, in particular, may require additional mitigation measures given their potential susceptibility to a rapidly changing climate.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".