Cytonuclear evidence for hybridogenetic reproduction in natural populations of the Australian carp gudgeon (<i>Hypseleotris</i>: Eleotridae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although most vertebrates reproduce sexually, a small number of fishes, amphibians and reptiles are known in which reproduction is asexual, i.e. without meiotic recombination. In fishes, these so-called unisexual lineages usually comprise only females and utilize co-occurring males of a related sexual species to reproduce via gynogenesis or hybridogenesis. Here, we examine patterns of microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation in a widespread group of freshwater fishes (carp gudgeons; Hypseleotris spp.) to investigate a long-standing proposal that this group includes unisexual forms. We show that the mtDNA genome of most carp gudgeons in tributaries of the Goulburn River belongs to one of two deeply divided clades (∼10% cyt b divergence) and that nuclear variation divides the same individuals into four distinct groups. Group 1 exhibits the genotypic proportions of a random mating population and has a 1:1 sex ratio. Two other groups are extremely sex-biased (98% male, 96% female), exhibit excess heterozygosity at most loci and share at least one allele per locus with group 1. We propose that these two groups represent 'unisexual' hybridogenetic lineages and that both utilize co-occurring group 1 as sexual host. Interestingly, the fourth distinct group appears to represent hybrid offspring of the two putative hybridogenetic lineages. The propagation of clonal haploid genomes by both males and females and the ability of these clones to unite and form sexually mature diploid hybrid offspring may represent a novel mechanism that contributes to the dynamics of coexistence between hybridogenetic lineages and their sexual hosts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".