Driven Apart: The Evolution of Ploidy Differences between the Sexes under Antagonistic Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual reproduction in eukaryotes implies a biphasic life cycle with alternating haploid and diploid phases. The nature of the biphasic life cycle varies markedly across taxa, and often either the diploid or the haploid phase is predominant. Why some taxa spend a major part of their life cycle as diploids and others as haploids remains a conundrum. Furthermore, ploidy levels may not only vary across life cycle phases but may also differ between males and females. The existence of two life cycle phases and two sexes bears a high potential for antagonistic selection, which in turn may influence the evolution of ploidy levels. We explored the evolution of ploidy levels when selection depends on both ploidy and sex. Our analyses show that antagonistic selection may drive the ploidy levels between males and females apart. In a subsequent step, we explicitly explored the evolution of arrhenotoky (i.e., haploid males and diploid females) in the context of antagonistic selection. Our model shows that selection on arrhenotoky depends on male fitness but evolves regardless of the fitness consequences to females. Overall we provide a plausible explanation for the evolution of sex differences in ploidy levels, a principle that can be extended to any system with asymmetric inheritance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".