INTROGRESSION VERSUS IMMIGRATION IN HYBRIDIZING HIGH-DISPERSAL ECHINODERMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogeographic studies designed to estimate rates and patterns of genetic differentiation within species often reveal unexpected and graphically striking cases of allele or haplotype sharing between species (introgression) via hybridization and backcrossing. Does introgression between species significantly influence population genetic structure relative to more conventional sources of differentiation (drift) and similarity (dispersal) among populations within species? Here we use mtDNA sequences from four species in two genera of sea urchins and sea stars to quantify the relative magnitude of gene flow across oceans and across species boundaries in the context of the trans-Arctic interchange of marine organisms between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. In spite of the much smaller distances between sympatric congeners, rates of gene flow between sympatric species via heterospecific gamete interactions were small and significantly lower than gene flow across oceans via dispersal of planktonic larvae. We conclude that, in these cases at least, larvae are more effective than gametes as vectors of gene flow.
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".