Post‐mating prezygotic barriers to gene exchange between hybridizing field crickets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of sexual selection in speciation have traditionally focused on mate preference, with less attention given to traits that act between copulation and fertilization. However, recent work suggests that post-mating prezygotic barriers may play an important role in speciation. Here, we evaluate the role of such barriers in the field crickets, Gryllus firmus and Gryllus pennsylvanicus. Gryllus pennsylvanicus females mated with G. firmus males produce viable, fertile offspring, but when housed with both species produce offspring sired primarily by conspecifics. We evaluate patterns of sperm utilization in doubly mated G. pennsylvanicus females and find no evidence for conspecific sperm precedence. The reciprocal cross (G. firmus female × G. pennsylvanicus male) produces no progeny. Absence of progeny reflects a barrier to fertilization rather than reduced sperm transfer, storage or motility. We propose a classification scheme for mechanisms underlying post-mating prezygotic barriers similar to that used for premating barriers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".