Genomic and Mitonuclear Patterns of Divergence Among Recently Diverged White‐Crowned Sparrow Subspecies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Genetic divergence and subsequent speciation are possible within the range and habitat of a population. White‐crowned sparrows are comprised of five subspecies that thrive in a wide range of habitats, latitudes, and elevations across North America, suggesting the ability for local adaptation and rapid divergence. We assessed genome‐wide genetic differentiation in four populations of white‐crowned sparrow ( Zonotrichia leucophrys gambelii , Z. l. oriantha (northern and southern), and Z. l. pugetensis ) and compared patterns of genetic structure using outlier single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), including mitochondrial (255 SNPs) and Z chromosome (580 SNPs) loci. When these four populations are assessed using the full SNP dataset, three genetic clusters are identified: pugetensis , southern oriantha , and northern oriantha grouped with gambelii . However, four genetic clusters are supported by the Z chromosome outlier SNPs corresponding to three subspecies and a north–south split in Z. l. oriantha . Our analyses pointed to consistent divergence of Zonotrichia leucophrys pugetensis from other populations and mitochondrial SNPs showed overlap of southern Z. l. oriantha and Z. l. gambelii . Interestingly, northern Z. l. oriantha populations are more genetically similar to Z. l. gambelii as opposed to its sister population, the southern Z. l. oriantha . We found a region on the Z chromosome with highly elevated F ST among all the populations. The genetic clusters identified in our study may be suggestive of evolutionary events such as selection on the Z chromosome, and this may be driving divergence in white‐crowned sparrows.
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".