MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263728493 · doi:10.1111/mec.13569

Revisiting a classic case of introgression: hybridization and gene flow in Californian sunflowers

2016· article· en· W2263728493 on OpenAlexafffund
Gregory L. Owens, Gregory J. Baute, Loren H. Rieseberg

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIntrogressionBiologyGene flowHelianthusEvolutionary biologyPopulationInvasive speciesSpecies complexIntroduced speciesBotanyEcologyZoologyGenetic variationGeneGeneticsPhylogenetic treeSunflowerAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During invasion, colonizing species can hybridize with native species, potentially swamping out native genomes. However, theory predicts that introgression will often be biased into the invading species. Thus, empirical estimates of gene flow between native and invasive species are important to quantify the actual threat of hybridization with invasive species. One classic example of introgression occurs in California, where Helianthus bolanderi was thought to be a hybrid between the serpentine endemic Helianthus exilis and the congeneric invader Helianthus annuus. We used genotyping by sequencing to look for signals of introgression and population structure. We find that H. bolanderi and H. exilis form one genetic clade, with weak population structure that is associated with geographic location rather than soil composition and likely represent a single species, not two. Additionally, while our results confirmed early molecular analysis and failed to support the hybrid origin of H. bolanderi, we did find evidence for introgression mainly into the invader H. annuus, as predicted by theory.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.018
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207