Multiple paternity and male reproductive success in the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) in Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Nova Scotia population of Blanding's turtle is small and isolated from the main range of the species. Although there is no gene flow between the Nova Scotia population and any other populations of the species, there is no evidence of the inbreeding and loss of genetic diversity that often characterizes small populations. Multiple paternity is one method by which small populations of some species maintain genetic variation. Rates of multiple paternity as high as 70% have been estimated within the main species range of Blanding's turtle, and it has been hypothesized that this is one way that Blanding's turtle in Nova Scotia have maintained genetic variation. However, previous microsatellite assays suggest very low rates of multiple paternity in the Nova Scotia population. We have genotyped hatchlings from 21 nests and two years at three microsatellite loci. This resulted in combined genotypes at eight microsatellite loci; these were analyzed using the program GERUD 2.0 to determine the minimum number of sires for each clutch and to suggest potential parental genotypes. We find the rate of multiple paternity in Nova Scotia to be 29-33%. The low rate of multiple paternity correlates with previous data suggesting low male reproductive success. These data indicate that the danger of inbreeding and loss of genetic variation may be greater than previously expected.
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".