Population Genetic Structure of the Tropical Two-Wing Flyingfish (Exocoetus volitans)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delineating populations of pantropical marine fish is a difficult process, due to widespread geographic ranges and complex life history traits in most species. Exocoetus volitans, a species of two-winged flyingfish, is a good model for understanding large-scale patterns of epipelagic fish population structure because it has a circumtropical geographic range and completes its entire life cycle in the epipelagic zone. Buoyant pelagic eggs should dictate high local dispersal capacity in this species, although a brief larval phase, small body size, and short lifespan may limit the dispersal of individuals over large spatial scales. Based on these biological features, we hypothesized that E. volitans would exhibit statistically and biologically significant population structure defined by recognized oceanographic barriers. We tested this hypothesis by analyzing cytochrome b mtDNA sequence data (1106 bps) from specimens collected in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans (n = 266). AMOVA, Bayesian, and coalescent analytical approaches were used to assess and interpret population-level genetic variability. A parsimony-based haplotype network did not reveal population subdivision among ocean basins, but AMOVA revealed limited, statistically significant population structure between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans (ΦST = 0.035, p<0.001). A spatially-unbiased Bayesian approach identified two circumtropical population clusters north and south of the Equator (ΦST = 0.026, p<0.001), a previously unknown dispersal barrier for an epipelagic fish. Bayesian demographic modeling suggested the effective population size of this species increased by at least an order of magnitude ~150,000 years ago, to more than 1 billion individuals currently. Thus, high levels of genetic similarity observed in E. volitans can be explained by high rates of gene flow, a dramatic and recent population expansion, as well as extensive and consistent dispersal throughout the geographic range of the species.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".