Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in ploidy occurred early in the diversification of some animal and plant lineages and represent an ongoing phenomenon in others. While the prevalence of polyploid lineages indicates that this phenomenon is a common and successful evolutionary transition, whether polyploidization itself has a significant effect on patterns and rates of diversification remains an open question. Here we review evidence for the creative role of polyploidy in evolution. We present new estimates for the incidence of polyploidy in ferns and flowering plants based on a simple model describing transitions between odd and even base chromosome numbers. These new estimates indicate that ploidy changes may represent from 2 to 4% of speciation events in flowering plants and 7% in ferns. Speciation via polyploidy is likely to be one of the more predominant modes of sympatric speciation in plants, owing to its potentially broad-scale effects on gene regulation and developmental processes, effects that can produce immediate shifts in morphology, breeding system, and ecological tolerances. Theoretical models support the potential for increased adaptability in polyploid lineages. The evidence suggests that polyploidization can produce shifts in genetic systems and phenotypes that have the potential to result in increased evolutionary diversification, yet conclusive evidence that polyploidy has changed rates and patterns of diversification remains elusive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".