Population Genetics of Drosophila ananassae: Evidence for Population Sub-Structuring at the Level of Inversion Polymorphism in Indian Natural Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drosophila ananassae is a cosmopolitan and domestic species distributed in the tropical, subtropical and mildlytemperate regions. Population structure analysis in forty-five Indian natural populations of D. ananassae was performedemploying three cosmopolitan inversions as markers. Pairwise FST analysis and genetic distance (D) values showed stronggenetic differentiation. Though, lowermost values correspond to geographically closest populations, we did not find anysignificant ‘isolation by distance’ effect. Values of gene flow based on FST estimates are very low (Nm < 5). All thesefindings, viz. strong genetic differentiation and minimal gene flow indicate strong sub-structuring in Indian naturalpopulations of D. ananassae at the level of inversion polymorphism. This finding is particularly intriguing in case of D.ananassae as it is frequently transported via human traffic. Given limited gene flow, populations are expected to divergegenetically due to drift. Low level of gene flow coupled with high degree of genetic differentiation might have occurredhistorically and is maintained currently. Demographic properties, historical and contemporary events and other factors aremore important in shaping the patterns of population sub-structuring, genetic differentiation and gene flow than mereterrestrial habitat characteristics (un) favorable for migration.
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".