Revisiting the Dioecy-Polyploidy Association: Alternate Pathways and Research Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolutionary transition from hermaphroditism (combined sexes) to dioecy (separate sexes) is associated with whole genome duplication (polyploidy) in several flowering plant genera. Moreover, there is evidence for transitions in the opposite direction, i.e. a loss of dioecy with an increase in ploidy. Here, we review evidence for these associations, synthesize previous ideas on the mechanism underlying the patterns and explore alternative pathways. Specifically, we examine potential ecological and genetic mechanisms, differentiated by whether ploidy or gender (functional sex expression of the plant) changes are the primary cause and whether the effect is direct or indirect. An analysis of 22 genera variable for both ploidy and gender indicates that gender monomorphism (hermaphroditism, monoecy) is more common among diploid than polyploid species, whereas gender dimorphism (dioecy, gynodioecy, subdioecy) is more frequent among polyploid species. The transition from diploid hermaphroditic to polyploid gender-dimorphic taxa may arise directly through changes in gender as a result of genome duplication through genomic rearrangements or homeologous recombination, or changes in gender may result in increased unreduced gamete production leading to polyploid formation. Alternatively, the transition may occur through the indirect effects of genome duplication on mating system and inbreeding depression, which favor selection for unisexuality, or habitat shifts associated with unisexuality may simultaneously cause increased unreduced gamete production. Novel mechanisms for transitions in the opposite direction (from dioecy to hermaphroditism with increase in ploidy) include disruption of genetic sex determination and the benefits of reproductive assurance. We highlight key questions requiring further attention and promising approaches for answering them and better clarifying the genesis of sexual system polyploidy associations. See also the sister article focusing on animals by Wertheim et al. in this themed issue.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".