Elimination of altered karyotypes by sexual reproduction preserves species identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resolving the persistence of sexual reproduction despite its overwhelming costs (known as the paradox of sex) is one of the most persistent challenges of evolutionary biology. In thinking about this paradox, the focus has traditionally been on the evolutionary benefits of genetic recombination in generating offspring diversity and purging deleterious mutations. The similarity of pattern between evolution of organisms and evolution among cancer cells suggests that the asexual process generates more diverse genomes owing to less controlled reproduction systems, while sexual reproduction generates more stable genomes because the sexual process can serve as a mechanism to "filter out" aberrations at the chromosome level. Our reinterpretation of data from the literature strongly supports this hypothesis. Thus, the principal consequence of sexual reproduction is the reduction of drastic genetic diversity at the genome or chromosome level, resulting in the preservation of species identity rather than the provision of evolutionary diversity for future environmental challenges. Genetic recombination does contribute to genetic diversity, but it does so secondarily and within the framework of the chromosomally defined genome.
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".