Contrasted Polymorphism Patterns in a Large Sample of Populations From the Evolutionary Genetics Model <i>Drosophila simulans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
African populations of Drosophila simulans are thought to be ancestral in this model species and are increasingly used for testing general hypotheses in evolutionary genetics. It is often assumed that African populations are more likely to be at a neutral mutation drift equilibrium than other populations. Here we examine population structuring and the demographic profile in nine populations of D. simulans. We surveyed sequence variation in four X-linked genes (runt, sevenless, Sex-lethal, and vermilion) that have been used in a parallel study in the closely related species D. melanogaster. We found that an eastern group of populations from continental Africa and Indian Ocean islands (Kenya, Tanzania, Madagascar, and Mayotte Island) is widespread, shows little differentiation, and has probably undergone demographic expansion. The other two African populations surveyed (Cameroon and Zimbabwe) show no evidence of population expansion and are markedly differentiated from each other as well as from the populations from the eastern group. Two other populations, Europe and Antilles, are probably recent invaders to these areas. The Antilles population is probably derived from Europe through a substantial bottleneck. The history of these populations should be taken into account when drawing general conclusions from variation patterns.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".