Patterns of differentiation in a colour polymorphism and in neutral markers reveal rapid genetic changes in natural damselfly populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existence and mode of selection operating on heritable adaptive traits can be inferred by comparing population differentiation in neutral genetic variation between populations (often using F(ST) values) with the corresponding estimates for adaptive traits. Such comparisons indicate if selection acts in a diversifying way between populations, in which case differentiation in selected traits is expected to exceed differentiation in neutral markers [F(ST )(selected) > F(ST )(neutral)], or if negative frequency-dependent selection maintains genetic polymorphisms and pulls populations towards a common stable equilibrium [F(ST) (selected) < F(ST) (neutral)]. Here, we compared F(ST) values for putatively neutral data (obtained using amplified fragment length polymorphism) with estimates of differentiation in morph frequencies in the colour-polymorphic damselfly Ischnura elegans. We found that in the first year (2000), population differentiation in morph frequencies was significantly greater than differentiation in neutral loci, while in 2002 (only 2 years and 2 generations later), population differentiation in morph frequencies had decreased to a level significantly lower than differentiation in neutral loci. Genetic drift as an explanation for population differentiation in morph frequencies could thus be rejected in both years. These results indicate that the type and/or strength of selection on morph frequencies in this system can change substantially between years. We suggest that an approach to a common equilibrium morph frequency across all populations, driven by negative frequency-dependent selection, is the cause of these temporal changes. We conclude that inferences about selection obtained by comparing F(ST) values from neutral and adaptive genetic variation are most useful when spatial and temporal data are available from several populations and time points and when such information is combined with other ecological sources of data.
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".