MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513355922 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1605626113

Hybridization can facilitate species invasions, even without enhancing local adaptation

2016· article· en· W2513355922 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen B. Mesgaran, Mark A. Lewis, Peter K. Ades, Kathleen Donohue, Sara Ohadi, Chengjun Li, Roger Cousens

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Local adaptationBiologyEvolutionary biologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The founding population in most new species introductions, or at the leading edge of an ongoing invasion, is likely to be small. Severe Allee effects-reductions in individual fitness at low population density-may then result in a failure of the species to colonize, even if the habitat could support a much larger population. Using a simulation model for plant populations that incorporates demography, mating systems, quantitative genetics, and pollinators, we show that Allee effects can potentially be overcome by transient hybridization with a resident species or an earlier colonizer. This mechanism does not require the invocation of adaptive changes usually attributed to invasions following hybridization. We verify our result in a case study of sequential invasions by two plant species where the outcrosser Cakile maritima has replaced an earlier, inbreeding, colonizer Cakile edentula (Brassicaceae). Observed historical rates of replacement are consistent with model predictions from hybrid-alleviated Allee effects in outcrossers, although other causes cannot be ruled out.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.112 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations95
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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