Behavioral, Molecular, and Morphological Evidence for a Hybrid Zone Between <I>Chrysochus auratus</I> and <I>C. cobaltinus</I> (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we describe a hybrid zone between the chrysomelid beetles, Chrysochus auratus (F.), and C. cobaltinus LeConte, which have historically been considered as having allopatric distributions. By combining field studies with surveys of museum specimens, we documented that in western North America there are two regions in which these beetles are sympatric, and four additional regions in which populations of the two species are <100 km apart. In south-central Washington, we found an ≈25 km wide area of sympatry in which the two species freely interbreed. Morphological and allozyme differences between the species allowed us to demonstrate that individuals with intermediate coloration in this area are indeed hybrids; all 22 putative hybrids we assayed for allozyme variation were heterozygous at each of three species-specific loci. Museum specimens revealed that the two species have been hybridizing in this region at least since 1952. Within the hybrid zone, ≈10–15% of the beetles is apparently F1hybrids. At one focal site, 22.9% of all matings involved heterospecific pairs and 20.8% of all matings involved at least one hybrid individual. Although we found no molecular evidence of introgression between the two species, morphometric results and preliminary ecological data suggest possible past introgression or weak ongoing introgression. We discuss the implications of our findings for the specific status of these two species. This system appears well suited to provide answers to long-standing questions concerning the evolution of premating barriers between hybridizing species. In addition, hybridization between these two beetle species with differing host ranges will allow us to test the hypothesis that ecologically significant traits such as diet breadth can be gained via introgression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".