Genetic and Morphological Data for a Spring Peeper Contact Zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>These are genetic and morphological data for samples of Spring Peepers (Pseudacris crucifer) collected across a south-western Ontario hybrid zone between two mitochondrial lineages, denoted as Eastern and Interior by Austin et al. (2002, 2004). Mitochondrial data span 2003-2011, and microsatellite and morphometrics from 2008-2011. These data were collected by Jim D. Austin (2003-2005) and Kathryn A. Stewart as parts of their doctoral theses under the supervision of Dr. Stephen Lougheed, Queen ’s University, Kingston Ontario.</p> <p>Variables included in the data are as follows:</p> <ul> <li>First column represents ID numbers.</li> <li>Second column and third column represent capture person and year of collection, respectively.</li> <li>Fourth column represents population of origin.</li> <li>Fifth column designates sex of individual captured.</li> <li>Sixth column represents designated mtDNA lineage (following protocol from Austin et al. 2002).</li> <li>Columns seven to twenty-eight e ncompass 11 microsatellite primer data, wherein two alleles per locus are located in adjacent columns. </li> <li>Columns twenty-nine to thirty-six include morphometric information (Snout-Vent length or SVL, Head Width or HW, Radioulna, Femur, Tibia, Foot and Mass, respectively.</li> <li>Column thirty-seven records the date of capture of each individual.</li> </ul>
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 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".