Genetic diversity and population structure of two endangered neotropical parrots inform In Situ and Ex Situ conservation strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A key aspect in the conservation of endangered populations is understanding patterns of genetic variation and structure, which can provide managers with critical information to support evidence-based status assessments and management strategies. This is especially important for species with small wild and larger captive populations, as found in many endangered parrots. We used genotypic data to assess genetic variation and structure in wild and captive populations of two endangered parrots, the blue-throated macaw, Ara glaucogularis, of Bolivia, and the thick-billed parrot, Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha, of Mexico. In the blue-throated macaw, we found evidence of weak genetic differentiation between wild northern and southern subpopulations, and between wild and captive populations. In the thick-billed parrot we found no signal of differentiation between the Madera and Tutuaca breeding colonies or between wild and captive populations. Similar levels of genetic diversity were detected in the wild and captive populations of both species, with private alleles detected in captivity in both, and in the wild in the thick-billed parrot. We found genetic signatures of a bottleneck in the northern blue-throated macaw subpopulation, but no such signal was identified in any other subpopulation of either species. Our results suggest both species could potentially benefit from reintroduction of genetic variation found in captivity, and emphasize the need for genetic management of captive populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".