Genome duplication and the evolution of conspecific pollen precedence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conspecific pollen precedence can be a strong reproductive barrier between polyploid and diploid species, but the role of genome multiplication in the evolution of this barrier has not been investigated. Here, we examine the direct effect of genome duplication on the evolution of pollen siring success in tetraploid Chamerion angustifolium. To separate the effects of genome duplication from selection after duplication, we compared pollen siring success of synthesized tetraploids (neotetraploids) with that of naturally occurring tetraploids by applying 2x, 4x (neo or established) or 2x + 4x pollen to diploid and tetraploid flowers. Seed set increased in diploids and decreased in both types of tetraploids as the proportion of pollen from diploid plants increased. Based on offspring ploidy from mixed-ploidy pollinations, pollen of the maternal ploidy always sired the majority of offspring but was strongest in established tetraploids and weakest in neotetraploids. Pollen from established tetraploids had significantly higher siring rates than neotetraploids when deposited on diploid (4x(est) = 47.2%, 4x(neo) = 27.1%) and on tetraploid recipients (4x(est) = 91.9%, 4x(neo) = 56.0%). Siring success of established tetraploids exceeded that of neotetraploids despite having similar pollen production per anther and pollen diameter. Our results suggest that, while pollen precedence can arise in association with the duplication event, the strength of polyploid siring success evolves after the duplication event.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".