COMPARATIVE PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF THE EVOLUTION OF SEMELPARITY AND LIFE HISTORY IN SALMONID FISHES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The selective pressures involved in the evolution of semelparity and its associated life-history traits are largely unknown. We used species-level analyses, independent contrasts, and reconstruction of ancestral states to study the evolution of body length, fecundity, egg weight, gonadosomatic index, and parity (semelparity vs. degree of iteroparity) in females of 12 species of salmonid fishes. According to both species-level analysis and independent contrasts analysis, body length was positively correlated with fecundity, egg weight, and gonadosomatic index, and semelparous species exhibited a significantly steeper slope for the regression of egg weight on body length than did iteroparous species. Percent repeat breeding (degree of iteroparity) was negatively correlated with gonadosomatic index using independent contrasts analysis. Semelparous species had significantly larger eggs by species-level analysis, and the egg weight contrast for the branch on which semelparity was inferred to have originated was significantly larger than the other egg weight contrasts, corresponding to a remarkable increase in egg weight. Reconstruction of ancestral states showed that egg weight and body length apparently increased with the origin of semelparity, but fecundity and gonadosomatic index remained more or less constant or decreased. Thus, the strong evolutionary linkages between body size, fecundity, and gonadosomatic index were broken during the transition from iteroparity to semelparity. These findings suggest that long-distance migrations, which increase adult mortality between breeding episodes, may have been necessary for the origin of semelparity in Pacific salmon, but that increased egg weight, leading to increased juvenile survivorship, was crucial in driving the transition. Our analyses support the life-history hypotheses that a lower degree of repeat breeding is linked to higher reproductive investment per breeding episode, and that semelparity evolves under a combination of relatively high juvenile survivorship and relatively low adult survivorship.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".