MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214918006 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1512004112

Evolution of haploid selection in predominantly diploid organisms

2015· article· en· W2214918006 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah P. Otto, Michael Scott, Simone Immler

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPloidySelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyGametophyteEvolutionary biologyGeneticsPollenEcologyGeneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diploid organisms manipulate the extent to which their haploid gametes experience selection. Animals typically produce sperm with a diploid complement of most proteins and RNA, limiting selection on the haploid genotype. Plants, however, exhibit extensive expression in pollen, with actively transcribed haploid genomes. Here we analyze models that track the evolution of genes that modify the strength of haploid selection to predict when evolution intensifies and when it dampens the "selective arena" within which male gametes compete for fertilization. Considering deleterious mutations, evolution leads diploid mothers to strengthen selection among haploid sperm/pollen, because this reduces the mutation load inherited by their diploid offspring. If, however, selection acts in opposite directions in haploids and diploids ("ploidally antagonistic selection"), mothers evolve to reduce haploid selection to avoid selectively amplifying alleles harmful to their offspring. Consequently, with maternal control, selection in the haploid phase either is maximized or reaches an intermediate state, depending on the deleterious mutation rate relative to the extent of ploidally antagonistic selection. By contrast, evolution generally leads diploid fathers to mask mutations in their gametes to the maximum extent possible, whenever masking (e.g., through transcript sharing) increases the average fitness of a father's gametes. We discuss the implications of this maternal-paternal conflict over the extent of haploid selection and describe empirical studies needed to refine our understanding of haploid selection among seemingly diploid organisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207