Contrasting hybridization rates between sympatric three‐spined sticklebacks highlight the fragility of reproductive barriers between evolutionarily young species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) are a powerful evolutionary model system due to the rapid and repeated phenotypic divergence of freshwater forms from a marine ancestor throughout the Northern Hemisphere. Many of these recently derived populations are found in overlapping habitats, yet are reproductively isolated from each other. This scenario provides excellent opportunities to investigate the mechanisms driving speciation in natural populations. Genetically distinguishing between such recently derived species, however, can create difficulties in exploring the ecological and genetic factors defining species boundaries, an essential component to our understanding of speciation. We overcame these limitations and increased the power of analyses by selecting highly discriminatory markers from the battery of genetic markers now available. Using species diagnostic molecular profiles, we quantified levels of hybridization and introgression within three sympatric species pairs of three-spined stickleback. Sticklebacks within Priest and Paxton lakes exhibit a low level of natural hybridization and provide support for the role of reinforcement in maintaining distinct species in sympatry. In contrast, our study provides further evidence for a continued breakdown of the Enos Lake species pair into a hybrid swarm, with biased introgression of the 'limnetic' species into that of the 'benthic'; a situation that highlights the delicate balance between persistence and breakdown of reproductive barriers between young species. A similar strategy utilizing the stickleback microsatellite resource can also be applied to answer an array of biological questions in other species' pair systems in this geographically widespread and phenotypically diverse model organism.
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".