Effect of Multiple Founder Events on Genetic Variation: Transplanted Populations of Bighorn Sheep (<i>Ovis canadensis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of reintroductions has become a widely used tool in the conservation of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). In an effort to reestablish populations of bighorn sheep in Utah, 23 individuals from two existing populations in British Columbia, Canada, Tranquille and Harper Ranch, were transplanted to Antelope Island in the Great Salt Lake of Utah. The two British Columbian populations had been founded from a native population near William's Lake, also in British Columbia. Small transplanted populations may have lower levels of genetic variation relative to the source population due to the chance loss of alleles following the founder event. In addition, this variation may be further reduced through inbreeding and drift, which are increased as a consequence of small effective population size, Ne. RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism) analysis of the mitochondrial genome, as well as microsatellite and RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA) analysis of the nuclear genome were used to estimate molecular variation following these transplants. Mitochondrial variation was lost in the initial transplant from William's Lake to Tranquille and Harper Ranch. Three haplotypes were found in the initial population; no mitochondrial variation was found in subsequent populations. Number of polymorphic RAPD loci decreased with each founder event, ranging from 9.0% in the William's Lake population to 6.9% in the Antelope Island population. Levels of microsatellite heterozygosity did not decline with each transplant. Population differentiation was measured to determine if transplants had been representative of the source populations. Overall measures of population differentiation indicated little to moderate levels of population genetic structure (FST=0.045; ΦST=0.086). Number of polymorphic RAPD loci decreased in the F1 generation (3.2%) relative to the parental generation (6.9%) on Antelope Island most likely due to low effective population size. The estimate of effective population size from demographic data is 12.8. These data indicate that founder effect and low effective population size have resulted in reduced levels of genetic variation in these 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".