1,720,964 research outputs found
A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
No full textJackson, Donavan J, Cook, Joseph A (2020): A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1): 36-51, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyz19
Fig. 2 in A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
No full textFig. 2.—Distribution of Microtus pennsylvanicus (modified from IUCN) with dots representing sampling localities of specimens in Supplementary Data SD2. Colors correspond to four well-supported cytochrome b (Cytb) clades with solid lines representing hypothesized range limits of each clade.Published as part of Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1) on page 40, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, http://zenodo.org/record/783247
Fig. 3.—A Bayesian cytochrome b in A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
No full textFig. 3.—A Bayesian cytochrome b (Cytb) gene tree for 63 species of Microtus. Posterior probability of> 0.95 are depicted by asterisk. The inset shows M. breweri nested within M. pennsylvanicus. Two species of Chionomys were used as outgroups and are shown at the bottom of the tree (C. roberti and C. nivalis).Published as part of Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1) on page 42, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, http://zenodo.org/record/783247
Fig. 4.—A Bayesian cytochrome b in A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
No full textFig. 4.—A Bayesian cytochrome b (Cytb) gene tree for 50 individuals of Microtus pennsylvanicus. Colors correspond to Cytb clades depicted in Fig. 2. Posterior probability of> 0.95 are denoted by an asterisk. Four species of Microtus were used as outgroups and are shown in black (M. longicaudus, M. townsendii, M. canicaudus, and M. montanus).Published as part of Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1) on page 43, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, http://zenodo.org/record/783247
Microtus Schrank 1798
No full textMicrotus Phylogeny Inferred from Cytochrome b The evolutionary relationships for 64 species of Microtus were reconstructed based on Cytb sequences (n = 118), producing the most comprehensive phylogeny for the genus to date. We included two recently proposed species (M. gromovi — Bannikova et al. 2010; M. atticus — Rovatsos and Giagia-Athanasopoulou 2012), two species of questionable status (M. rossiaemeridionalis and M. obscurus — Musser and Carleton 2005), and the first mitochondrial sequences for M. breweri. Because the GenBank accessions were derived from multiple studies, sequences ranged from 489 to 1,140 bp in length. Relationships across the phylogeny are largely congruent with previous studies (Conroy and Cook 2000; Jaarola et al. 2004; Martinkova et al. 2012); however, M. breweri is shown to be nested within M. pennsylvanicus (Fig. 3). Genetic distances (K2P shown below with p -distance included in Supplementary Data SD4) between 13 sister species pairs recovered on this phylogeny averaged 5% (range 1.5–9.7%). Lowest divergence values were between the controversial species M. rossiaemeridionalis – M. levis (0.2%), followed by M. abbreviatus – M. miurus (1.5%), and M. bavaricus – M. liechtensteini (1.6%), while highest sister species divergence was between M. daghestanicus – M. subterraneus (9.7%).Published as part of Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1) on page 41, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, http://zenodo.org/record/783247
Fig. 1 in A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus)
No full textFig. 1.—Distribution of subspecies of Microtus pennsylvanicus (modified from Hoffmann and Koeppl 1985) and the insular M. breweri: 1) M. p. acadicus, 2) M. p. admiraltiae, 3) M. p. alcorni, 4) M. p. aphorodemus, 5) M. p. chihuahuensis (extinct), 6) M. p. copelandi, 7) M. p. drummondii, 8) M. p. dukecampbelli, 9) M. p. enixus, 10) M. p. finitus, 11) M. p. fontigenus, 12) M. p. funebris, 13) M. p. insperatus, 14) M. p. kincaidi, 15) M. p. labradorius, 16) M. p. magdalenensis, 17) M. p. microcephalus, 18) M. p. modestus, 19) M. p. nesophilus (extinct), 20) M. p. nigrans, 21) M. p. pennsylvanicus, 22) M. p. provectus, 23) M. p. pullatus, 24) M. p. rubidus, 25) M. p. shattucki, 26) M. p. tananaensis, 27) M. p. terraenovae, 28) M. p. uligocola, and 29) M. breweri.Published as part of Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1) on page 38, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, http://zenodo.org/record/783247
Microtus Schrank 1798
No full textMicrotus <i>Phylogeny Inferred from Cytochrome b</i> <p> <i>Sampling and phylogenetic reconstruction.—</i> We inferred the phylogeny of species of <i>Microtus</i>, generally accepting the species designations of Musser and Carleton (2005). Cytochrome <i>b</i> (<i>Cytb</i>) sequences were downloaded for 110 individuals representing 62 species from GenBank (Supplementary Data SD1) with eight newly sequenced individuals (two represent the first sequences for <i>M. breweri</i>; Supplementary Data SD2) for a total of 118 individuals and 64 species of <i>Microtus</i>, with two outgroup species (<i>Chionomys robertsi</i> and <i>C. nivalis</i>). Exceptions to Musser and Carleton (2005) include the formally unrecognized species <i>M. gromovi</i> (Bannikova et al. 2010), <i>M. hartingi</i> (KryŠtufek et al. 2012), <i>M. atticus</i> (Rovatsos and Giagia-Athanasopoulou 2012), and two controversial species <i>M. rossiaemeridionalis</i> and <i>M. obscurus</i> (Jaarola et al. 2004; Bannikova 2010; Tougard et al. 2013; Markova et al. 2014), which we treat as distinct species. In addition, we included a single randomly chosen individual from each of four independent mtDNA lineages identified in <i>M. pennsylvanicus</i> (this study). All sequences were aligned in Geneious v. 8.1.9 (Kearse et al. 2012) using the MUSCLE (Edgar 2004) algorithm and phylogenetic reconstruction was carried out in BEAST v1.10.4 (Suchard et al. 2018) using the best-fit substitution model, GTR+I+G, from jModelTest with a uncorrelated relaxed lognormal clock prior. We used a Coalescent Constant Population tree prior and ran analyses for 40 million generations, sampling every 2,000 generations and excluding a 20% burn-in. Independent runs were assessed in TRACER v1.6.0 (Rambaut et al. 2014) ensuring effective sample size (ESS) was above 200 for all parameters and that independent runs had converged.</p> <p> <i>Genetic distance between</i> Microtus <i>species.</i> <i>—</i> Pairwise genetic distance (uncorrected <i>p</i> -distance and Kimura 2-parameter [K2P]) of <i>Cytb</i> sequences (excluding <i>M. pennsylvanicus</i> and its putative sister species <i>M. montanus</i>) was computed using the program MEGA7 (Kumar et al. 2016). All individuals were grouped by species if more than one individual was used in analyses and sister relationships were inferred from our Bayesian phylogeny. Mean between-group distance was computed under both uncorrelated <i>p</i> -distance and the K2P model; both were computed by bootstrapping with 1,000 replicates, with pairwise deletions for missing data.</p>Published as part of <i>Jackson, Donavan J & Cook, Joseph A, 2020, A precarious future for distinctive peripheral populations of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), pp. 36-51 in Journal of Mammalogy 101 (1)</i> on page 38, DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyz196, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/7832477">http://zenodo.org/record/7832477</a>
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
- …
