MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LOSS OF SEXUAL RECOMBINATION AND SEGREGATION IS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED DIVERSIFICATION IN EVENING PRIMROSES

2011· article· en· W1541386636 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc T. J. Johnson, Richard G. FitzJohn, Stacey D. Smith, Mark D. Rausher, Sarah P. Otto

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCompute CanadaNational Institute of General Medical SciencesWestern Canada Research GridNorth Carolina State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAsexualityBiologyAsexual reproductionEvolutionary biologyGenetic algorithmRecombinationPhylogenetic treeSexual reproductionMutation rateGeneticsHuman sexualityGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The loss of sexual recombination and segregation in asexual organisms has been portrayed as an irreversible process that commits asexually reproducing lineages to reduced diversification. We test this hypothesis by estimating rates of speciation, extinction, and transition between sexuality and functional asexuality in the evening primroses. Specifically, we estimate these rates using the recently developed BiSSE (Binary State Speciation and Extinction) phylogenetic comparative method, which employs maximum likelihood and Bayesian techniques. We infer that net diversification rates (speciation minus extinction) in functionally asexual evening primrose lineages are roughly eight times faster than diversification rates in sexual lineages, largely due to higher speciation rates in asexual lineages. We further reject the hypothesis that a loss of recombination and segregation is irreversible because the transition rate from functional asexuality to sexuality is significantly greater than zero and in fact exceeded the reverse rate. These results provide the first empirical evidence in support of the alternative theoretical prediction that asexual populations should instead diversify more rapidly than sexual populations because they are free from the homogenizing effects of sexual recombination and segregation. Although asexual reproduction may often constrain adaptive evolution, our results show that the loss of recombination and segregation need not be an evolutionary dead end in terms of diversification of lineages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207