MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910737370 · doi:10.5061/dryad.t8q3k

Data from: Adaptation of diploid and tetraploid Chamerion angustifolium to elevation but not local environment

2013· dataset· en· W6910737370 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2013
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCorporeality, Perception, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPloidyPolyploidAdaptation (eye)PopulationLocal adaptationLimitingHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyploid organisms often have different geographic ranges than their diploid relatives. However, it is unclear whether this divergence is maintained by adaptation or results from historical differences in colonization. Here we conducted a reciprocal transplant experiment with diploid and autotetraploid Chamerion angustifolium to test for adaptation at the ploidy and population level. In the Rocky Mountains, pure diploid populations occur at high elevations and pure autotetraploid populations occur at low elevations with mixed-ploidy populations between. We planted 3134 seedlings in 2004 and 3890 juveniles (bolting) in 2005 among nine plots, three in each of the diploid, mixed-ploidy and tetraploid zones, and monitored survival until 2008. For both seedlings and juvenile plants, elevation significantly influenced survival. The juvenile plants also showed a significant ploidy by elevation interaction, indicating that diploids and tetraploids survived best at their native elevations. In contrast, we found no evidence of local adaptation to plot within elevation. This suggests that the current distribution of diploids and tetraploids across elevations is the result of adaptation and that genome duplication may have facilitated the invasion of lower elevation habitats by limiting the movement of maladapted alleles from diploid populations at higher elevations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.015

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.117 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicCorporeality, Perception, and EducationFrench-language works237,207