Testing for mating isolation between ecotypes: laboratory experiments with lake, stream and hybrid stickleback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mating isolation is a frequent contributor to ecological speciation - but how consistently does it evolve as a result of divergent selection? We tested for genetically based mating isolation between lake and stream threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.) from the Misty watershed, Vancouver Island, British Columbia. We combined several design elements that are uncommon in the studies of stickleback mate choice: (i) we used second-generation laboratory-reared fish (to reduce environmental and maternal effects), (ii) we allowed for male-male competitive interactions (instead of the typical no-choice trials) and (iii) we included hybrids along with pure types. Males of different types (Lake, Inlet, hybrid) were paired in aquaria, allowed to build nests and then exposed sequentially to females of all three types. We found that Lake and Inlet males differed in behaviours thought to influence stickleback mate choice (inter- and intra-sexual aggression, display and nest activities), whereas hybrids were either intermediate or apparently 'inferior' in these behaviours. Despite these differences, Lake and Inlet fish did not mate assortatively and hybrid males did not have a mating disadvantage. Our study reinforces the noninevitability of mating isolation evolving in response to ecological differences and highlights the need to further investigate the factors promoting and constraining progress towards ecological speciation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".