Adaptive speciation when assortative mating is based on female preference for male marker traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive speciation occurs when frequency-dependent ecological interactions generate conditions of disruptive selection to which lineage splitting is an adaptive response. Under such selective conditions, evolution of assortative mating mechanisms enables the break-up of the ancestral lineage into diverging and reproductively isolated descendent species. Extending previous studies, I investigate models of adaptive speciation due to the evolution of indirect assortative mating that is based on three different mating traits: the degree of assortativity, a female preference trait and a male marker trait. For speciation to occur, linkage disequilibria between different mating traits, e.g. between female preference and male marker traits, as well as between mating traits and the ecological trait, must evolve. This can lead to novel speciation scenarios, e.g. when reproductive isolation is generated by a splitting in the degree of assortativeness, with one of the emerging lineages mating assortatively, and the other one disassortatively. I investigate the effects of variation in various model parameters on the likelihood of speciation, as well as robustness of speciation to introducing costs of assortative mating. Even though in the models presented speciation requires the genetic potential for strong assortment as well as rather restrictive ecological conditions, the results show that adaptive speciation due to the evolution of assortative mating when mate choice is based on separate female preference and male marker traits is a theoretically plausible evolutionary scenario.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".