Specialist versus generalist life histories and nucleotide diversity in<i>Caenorhabditis</i>nematodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species with broad ecological amplitudes with respect to a key focal resource, niche generalists, should maintain larger and more connected populations than niche specialists, leading to the prediction that nucleotide diversity will be lower and more subdivided in specialists relative to their generalist relatives. This logic describes the specialist-generalist variation hypothesis (SGVH). Some outbreeding species of Caenorhabditis nematodes use a variety of invertebrate dispersal vectors and have high molecular diversity. By contrast, Caenorhabditis japonica lives in a strict association and synchronized life cycle with its dispersal host, the shield bug Parastrachia japonensis, itself a diet specialist. Here, we characterize sequence variation for 20 nuclear loci to investigate how C. japonica's life history shapes nucleotide diversity. We find that C. japonica has more than threefold lower polymorphism than other outbreeding Caenorhabditis species, but that local populations are not genetically disconnected. Coupled with its restricted range, we propose that its specialist host association contributes to a smaller effective population size and lower genetic variation than host generalist Caenorhabditis species with outbreeding reproductive modes. A literature survey of diverse organisms provides broader support for the SGVH. These findings encourage further testing of ecological and evolutionary hypotheses with comparative population genetics in Caenorhabditis and other taxa.
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 | 0.001 | 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".