Assessing Postzygotic Isolation Using Zygotic Disequilibria in Natural Hybrid Zones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybrid zones as windows on evolutionary processes provide a natural laboratory for studying the genetic basis and mechanisms of postzygotic isolation. One resultant pattern in hybrid zones is the Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium (HWD) for a single locus or the linkage disequilibrium (LD) for multiple loci produced by natural selection against hybrids. However, HWD and the commonly used low-order gametic or composite digenic LD cannot fully reflect the pattern of the high-order genotypic interactions. Here we propose the use of zygotic LD to elucidate the selection mechanisms of postzygotic isolation, and its calculation is based on genotypic frequencies only, irrespective of the type of mating system. We numerically and analytically show that the maximum composite digenic LD is always greater than the maximum absolute zygotic LD under the linear-additive selection, but is comparable to or smaller than the maximum absolute zygotic LD under the strong epistatic selection. Selection mechanisms can be inferred by testing such differences. We analyze a previously reported mouse hybrid zone assayed with genome-wide SNPs, and confirm that the composite digenic LD cannot appropriately indicate all possible significant genotypic interactions for a given SNP pair. A large proportion of significant zygotic LDs, ∼75% in general in the mouse hybrid zone, cannot be revealed from the composite digenic LD analysis. Statistical tests indicate that epistatic selection occurred among multiple loci in the mouse hybrid zone. The results highlight that the joint patterns of the composite digenic and zygotic LDs can help to elucidate the selection mechanism that is potentially involved in postzygotic isolation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".