Genomic footprints of speciation in Atlantic eels (<i>Anguilla anguilla</i> and <i>A. rostrata</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of speciation-with-geneflow scenarios is increasingly appreciated. However, the specific processes and the resulting genomic footprints of selection are subject to much discussion. We studied the genomics of speciation between the two panmictic, sympatrically spawning sister species; European (Anguilla anguilla) and American eel (A. rostrata). Divergence is assumed to have initiated more than 3 Ma, and although low gene flow still occurs, strong postzygotic barriers are present. Restriction-site-associated DNA (RAD) sequencing identified 328 300 SNPs for subsequent analysis. However, despite the presence of 3757 strongly differentiated SNPs (FST > 0.8), sliding window analyses of FST showed no larger genomic regions (i.e. hundreds of thousands to millions of bases) of elevated differentiation. Overall FST was 0.041, and linkage disequilibrium was virtually absent for SNPs separated by more than 1000 bp. We suggest this to reflect a case of genomic hitchhiking, where multiple regions are under directional selection between the species. However, low but biologically significant gene flow and high effective population sizes leading to very low genetic drift preclude accumulation of strong background differentiation. Genes containing candidate SNPs for positive selection showed significant enrichment for gene ontology (GO) terms relating to developmental processes and phosphorylation, which seems consistent with assumptions that differences in larval phase duration and migratory distances underlie speciation. Most SNPs under putative selection were found outside coding regions, lending support to emerging views that noncoding regions may be more functionally important than previously assumed. In total, the results demonstrate the necessity of interpreting genomic footprints of selection in the context of demographic parameters and life-history features of the studied 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 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".