MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6929224036 · doi:10.5061/dryad.9061f

Data from: Conservation genetics of prickly sculpin (Cottus asper) at the periphery of its distribution range in Peace River, Canada

2013· dataset· en· W6929224036 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2013
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSculpinRange (aeronautics)PopulationGenetic diversityLineage (genetic)Interspecific competitionConservation geneticsPopulation geneticsThreatened species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populations at the edge of their range often invoke taxonomic confusion and are increasingly considered to harbour cryptic genetic diversity of significant adaptive potential. In the Peace River region of northwestern Canada, three sculpin species have been reported: spoonhead (Cottus ricei), slimy (Cottus cognatus) and prickly (Cottus asper) sculpin. Prickly sculpin occurrence in this region represents the most eastern edge of its distribution, but its status has remained uncertain following its initial discovery in 1989. These populations may represent an independently evolving lineage of special conservation concern, or be the consequence of an ongoing range expansion, possibly accompanied by interspecific hybridization with local species. Using a combination of mtDNA sequencing and microsatellite analyses, we did not find peripheral population differentiation or interspecific hybridization, suggesting that the Albertan Peace River population belongs to the same genetic group as its western counterparts. Future studies will benefit from a greater understanding of whether demographically independent prickly sculpin populations established in Alberta without the typical genetic signatures of expansion at the periphery of their range.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→