Differential strength of sex-biased hybrid inferiority in impeding gene flow may be a cause of Haldane's rule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In animals, if one sex of the F1 hybrid between two species is sterile or inviable, it is usually the heterogametic (XY or WZ) sex. This phenomenon, known as Haldane's rule, is currently thought to be coincidentally caused by different mechanisms in separate entities. The following questions have never been asked: Are heterogametic and homogametic inferiority (sterility or inviability) equivalent as isolating mechanisms? Could discrepancies between them, if existing, produce Haldane's rule? Here I consider sex-biased hybrid inferiority strictly as an isolating mechanism, and quantitatively evaluate its strength in impeding gene flow. The comparison reveals that the ability of sex-biased inferiority to impede gene flow varies according to the sex and chromosome involved. Heterogametic inferiority is a weaker barrier when unidirectional and a much stronger one when in compound reciprocal directions, compared with homogametic inferiority. Such differential strength may affect divergence in speciation and produce Haldane's rule.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".