Sexual homomorphism in dioecious trees: extensive tests fail to detect sexual dimorphism in Populus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of sexual dimorphism and expansion of sex chromosomes are both driven through sexual conflict, arising from differing fitness optima between males and females. Here, we pair work in poplar (Populus) describing one of the smallest sex-determining regions known thus far in complex eukaryotes (~100 kbp) with comprehensive tests for sexual dimorphism using >1300 individuals from two Populus species and assessing 96 non-reproductive functional traits. Against expectation, we found sexual homomorphism (no non-reproductive trait differences between the sexes), suggesting that gender is functionally neutral with respect to non-reproductive features that affect plant survival and fitness. Combined with a small sex-determining region, we infer that sexual conflict may be effectively stymied or non-existent within these taxa. Both sexual homomorphism and the small sex-determining region occur against a background of strong environmental selection and local adaptation in Populus. This presents a powerful hypothesis for the evolution of dioecious species. Here, we suggest that environmental selection may be sufficient to suppress and stymy sexual conflict if it acts orthogonal to sexual selection, thereby placing limitations on the evolution of sexual dimorphism and genomic expansion of sex chromosomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".