History rather than hybridization determines population structure and adaptation in <i>Populus balsamifera</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybridization between species is known to greatly affect their genetic diversity and, therefore, their evolution. Also, within species, there may be genetic clusters between which gene flow is limited, which may impact natural selection. However, few studies have looked simultaneously at the influence of among-species and within-species gene flow. Here, we study the influence of hybridization between Populus balsamifera and Populus trichocarpa on population structure and adaptation in P. balsamifera. We did this by sampling a total of 1517 individuals from across the ranges of these two species, and by genotyping them using a combination of 93 nuclear and 17 cpDNA SNPs. We found that hybridization is mostly limited to the contact zone where the species' distributions overlap. Within P. balsamifera, we found multiple levels of population structure. Interestingly, the border between the Eastern and Central clusters is very sharp, whereas the border between the Central and Western clusters is diffuse. Outlier analysis revealed that three loci associated with the sharp border were also associated with climate. We hypothesize that the observed clusters derive from three refugia during the Pleistocene ice ages. Between the Central and Western clusters, post-glacial long-distance gene flow has led to the diffusion of their border. In the Eastern cluster, we hypothesize that endogenous genomic barriers have developed, leading to the sharp border and a spurious climate association. We conclude that the large-scale genetic structure of P. balsamifera is mostly shaped by historical factors and the influence of interspecific hybridization is limited.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".