Sympatric Speciation: When Is It Possible in Bacteria?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to theory, sympatric speciation in sexual eukaryotes is favored when relatively few loci in the genome are sufficient for reproductive isolation and adaptation to different niches. Here we show a similar result for clonally reproducing bacteria, but which comes about for different reasons. In simulated microbial populations, there is an evolutionary tradeoff between early and late stages of niche adaptation, which is resolved when relatively few loci are required for adaptation. At early stages, recombination accelerates adaptation to new niches (ecological speciation) by combining multiple adaptive alleles into a single genome. Later on, without assortative mating or other barriers to gene flow, recombination generates unfit intermediate genotypes and homogenizes incipient species. The solution to this tradeoff may be simply to reduce the number of loci required for speciation, or to reduce recombination between species over time. Both solutions appear to be relevant in natural microbial populations, allowing them to diverge into ecological species under similar constraints as sexual eukaryotes, despite differences in their life histories.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".