Analysis of multilocus DNA reveals hybridization in a contact zone between <i>Empidonax</i> flycatchers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contact zones between recently diverged taxa offer unique opportunities to test whether the forms are reproductively isolated and therefore distinct species. The Pacific‐slope flycatcher Empidonax difficilis and Cordilleran flycatcher Empidonax occidentalis are closely related taxa that were officially separated into two species in 1989, a treatment that has been controversial due to reports of phenotypically intermediate birds across the southern interior of British Columbia and Alberta. We present the first analysis of molecular variation across this region, in order to determine whether there is genetic introgression between the taxa. Allopatric populations of Pacific‐slope and Cordilleran flycatchers belong to distinct mitochondrial clades, and all of the individuals sampled in interior southwestern Canada have the Pacific‐slope haplotype. In contrast, variation in nuclear DNA (AFLPs) indicates hybridization between Pacific‐slope and Cordilleran flycatchers in this region. We suggest that the discordance between the mitochondrial and nuclear markers most likely results from stochastic loss of Cordilleran mitochondrial haplotype lineages facilitated by asymmetries in mating due to earlier arrival and greater abundance of Pacific‐slope flycatchers in the contact zone. The discovery of hybridization between Pacific‐slope and Cordilleran flycatchers in southwestern Canada may call into question the decision to split them into two species. On the other hand, allopatric populations are genetically distinct in both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, and the hybridization might not affect populations outside of the contact zone. This study highlights the importance of employing multiple genetic markers in studies of contact zones between closely related species.
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".