RESEARCH ARTICLE The genetic legacy of extirpation and re-colonization in Vancouver Island wolves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hybridization between wild and domestic spe-cies is of conservation concern because it can result in the loss of adaptations and/or disappearance of a distinct taxon. Wolves from Vancouver Island, British Columbia (Canada), have been subject to several eradication campaigns during the twentieth century and were considered virtually extir-pated between 1950 and 1970. In this study, we use control region mitochondrial DNA sequences and 13 autosomal microsatellite loci to characterize Vancouver Island wolves as well as dogs from British Columbia. We observe a turn-over in the haplotypes of wolves sampled before and after the 1950–1970 period, when there was no permanent wolf population on the island, supporting the probable local extinction of wolves on Vancouver Island during this time, followed by re-colonization of the island by wolves from mainland British Columbia. In addition, we report the presence of a domestic dog mtDNA haplotype in three individuals eliminated in 1986 that were morphologically identified as wolves. Here we show that Vancouver Island wolves were also identified as wolves based on autosomal microsatellite data. We attribute the hybridization event to the episodically small size of this population during the re-colonization event. Our results demonstrate that at least one female hybrid offspring, resulting from a cross of a male wolf and a female dog or a female hybrid pet with dog mtDNA, successfully introgressed into the wolf population. No dogmtDNA has been previously reported in a population of wild wolves. Genetic data show that Vancouver Island wolves are distinct from dogs and thus should be recognized as a population of wild wolves. We suggest that the intro-gression took place due to the Allee effect, specifically a lack of mates when population size was low. Our findings exemplify how small populations are at risk of hybridization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".