<i>Drosophila</i> flies in “Evolution Canyon” as a model for incipient sympatric speciation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genetic basis of population divergence leading to adaptive radiation and speciation is a major unresolved problem of evolutionary biology. Molecular elucidation of "speciation genes" advanced recently, yet it remains without clear identification of the gene complexes participating in reproductive isolation between natural populations, particularly, in sympatry. Genetic divergence was discovered between Drosophila melanogaster populations inhabiting ecologically contrasting, opposite slopes in "Evolution Canyon" (EC), Mt. Carmel, Israel. Interslope migration of flies is easy and verified. Nevertheless, significant interslope D. melanogaster population divergence was established at EC involving habitat choice, mate choice, thermal and drought tolerances, adaptive genes, and mobile elements. Parallel patterns of stress tolerance, habitat choice, and mate choice were demonstrated in Drosophila simulans at EC, although on a smaller scale. However, some tests for interslope genetic differentiation in Drosophila, derived from the opposite EC slopes, gave somewhat controversial results. Here we present new empirical data on interslope genetic divergence of Drosophila at EC, and summarize previous supporting and controversial results. We suggest that Drosophila populations at EC represent a rare example, demonstrating how selection overrides migration, and propose an ad hoc ecological model of incipient sympatric divergence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".