Is Speciation Accompanied by Rapid Evolution? Insights from Comparing Reproductive and Nonreproductive Transcriptomes in<i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tempo and mode of evolutionary change during speciation have remained contentious until recently. While much of the evidence claiming speciation is an abrupt and rapid process comes from fossil data, recent molecular phylogenetics show that the background of gradual evolution is often broken by accelerated rates of molecular evolution during speciation. However, what kinds of genes affect or are affected by speciation remains unexplored. Our analysis of 4843 protein-coding genes in five species of the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup shows that while ~70% of genes follow clock-like evolution, between 17-19.67% of loci show signatures of accelerated rates of evolution in recently formed species. These genes show 2-3-fold higher rates of substitution in recently diverged species compared to older species. This fraction of loci affects a diverse range of functions. Only a small proportion of reproductive genes experience speciation-related accelerated changes but many sex-and -reproduction related genes show an interesting pattern of persistent rapid evolution suggesting that sex-and-reproduction related genes are under constant selective pressures. The identification of loci associated with accelerated evolution allows us to address the mechanisms of rapid evolution and speciation, which in our study appears to be a combination of both selection and rapid demographical changes.
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".