Female mating preference functions predict sexual selection against hybrids between sibling species of cichlid fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolutionary outcome of interspecific hybridization, i.e. collapse of species into a hybrid swarm, persistence or even divergence with reinforcement, depends on the balance between gene flow and selection against hybrids. If female mating preferences are open-ended but sign-inversed between species, they can theoretically be a source of such selection. Cichlid fish in African lakes have sustained high rates of speciation despite evidence for widespread hybridization, and sexual selection by female choice has been proposed as important in the origin and maintenance of species boundaries. However, it had never been tested whether hybridizing species have open-ended preference rules. Here we report the first experimental test using Pundamilia pundamilia, Pundamilia nyererei and their hybrids in three-way choice experiments. Hybrid males are phenotypically intermediate. Wild-caught females of both species have strong preferences for conspecific over heterospecific males. Their responses to F1 hybrid males are intermediate, but more similar to responses to conspecifics in one species and more similar to responses to heterospecifics in the other. We suggest that their mate choice mechanism may predispose haplochromine cichlids to maintain and perhaps undergo phenotypic diversification despite hybridization, and that species differences in female preference functions may predict the potential for adaptive trait transfer between hybridizing species.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".