Reduced Representation and Whole‐Genome Sequencing Approaches Highlight Beluga Whale Populations Associated to Eastern Canada Summer Aggregations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) inhabit the circumpolar Arctic and form discrete summer aggregations. Previous genetic studies using mitochondrial and microsatellite loci have delineated distinct populations associated to summer aggregations but the extent of dispersal and interbreeding among these populations remains largely unknown. Such information is essential for the conservation of populations in Canada as some are endangered and harvested for subsistence by Inuit communities. Here, we used reduced representation and whole-genome sequencing approaches to characterize population structure of beluga whales in eastern Canada and examine admixture between populations. A total of 905 beluga whales sampled between 1989 and 2021 were genotyped. Six main genomic clusters, with potential subclusters, were identified using multiple proxies for population structure. Most of the six main genomic clusters were consistent with previously identified populations, except in southeast Hudson Bay where two clusters were identified. Beluga summer aggregations may consequently be comprised of more than one distinct population. A low number of dispersers were identified between summer aggregations and limited interbreeding was detected between the six genomic clusters. Our work highlights the value of genomic approaches to improve our understanding of population structure and reproductive behavior in beluga whales, offering insights applicable to other cetacean species of conservation concern. An expansion of the geographical scope and increase in number of genotyped individuals will, however, be needed to improve the characterization of the finer scale structure and of the extent of admixture between populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".