Population Genetic Structure of Massachusetts Spotted Turtles using Microsatellite Markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Submitted in fulfillment of a 2013 Nantucket Biodiversity Initiative grant.<br> <br> We examined allelic diversity, genetic variability and population structure of three populations of spotted turtles in Massachusetts using six highly polymorphic microsatellite markers. Two of the populations were from the mainland (Canton and Halifax) and one was from Nantucket (Sanford Farm). Pairwise Fst and population assignment tests showed that overall, spotted turtles from all three locations belong to the same population. The two mainland populations are highly genetically similar and the Sanford Farm population is somewhat less genetically similar to the mainland groups. Assessment of allelic patterns indicates that the Sanford Farm population has the least allelic diversity, as it showed the fewest number of private alleles and the fewest number of different alleles at each locus. We also examined the relationship between two known spotted turtle populations on Nantucket. The two populations, at Sanford Farm and Medouie Creek, are virtually indistinguishable at two of the three loci that were tested.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".