Unisexual salamanders (genus Ambystoma) present a new reproductive mode for eukaryotes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To persist, unisexual and asexual eukaryotes must have reproductive modes that circumvent normal bisexual reproduction. Parthenogenesis, gynogenesis, and hybridogenesis are the modes that have generally been ascribed to various unisexuals. Unisexual Ambystoma are abundant around the Great Lakes region of North America, and have variously been described as having all 3 reproductive modes. Diploid and polyploid unisexuals have nuclear genomes that combine the haploid genomes of 2 to 4 distinct sexual species, but the mtDNA is unlike any of those 4 species and is similar to another species, Ambystoma barbouri. To obtain better resolution of the reproductive mode used by unisexual Ambystoma and to explore the relationship of A. barbouri to the unisexuals, we sequenced the mitochondrial control and highly variable intergenic spacer region of 48 ambystomatids, which included 28 unisexuals, representatives of the 4 sexual species and A. barbouri. The unisexuals have similar sequences over most of their range, and form a close sister group to A. barbouri, with an estimated time of divergence of 2.4-3.9 million years ago. Individuals from the Lake Erie Islands (Kelleys, Pelee, North Bass) have a haplotype that demonstrates an isolation event. We examined highly variable microsatellite loci, and found that the genetic makeup of the unisexuals is highly variable and that unisexual individuals share microsatellite alleles with sexual individuals within populations. Although many progeny from the same female had the same genotype for 5 microsatellite DNA loci, there was no indication that any particular genome is consistently inherited in a clonal fashion in a population. The reproductive mode used by unisexual Ambystoma appears to be unique; we suggest kleptogenesis as a new unisexual reproductive mode that is used by these salamanders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".