Haploid Selection Favors Suppressed Recombination Between Sex Chromosomes Despite Causing Biased Sex Ratios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To date, research on the evolution of sex chromosomes has focused on sexually antagonistic selection among diploids, which has been shown to be a potent driver of the strata and reduced recombination that characterize many sex chromosomes. However, significant selection can also occur on haploid genotypes during less conspicuous life cycle stages, e.g., competition among sperm/pollen or meiotic drive during gamete/spore production. These haploid selective processes are typically sex-specific, e.g., gametic/gametophytic competition typically occurs among sperm/pollen, and meiotic drive typically occurs during either spermatogenesis or oogenesis. We use models to investigate whether sex-specific selection on haploids could drive the evolution of recombination suppression on the sex chromosomes, as has been demonstrated for sex-specific selection among diploids. A potential complication is that zygotic sex-ratios become biased when haploid selected loci become linked to the sex-determining region because the zygotic sex ratio is determined by the relative number and fitness of X- vs. Y-bearing sperm. Despite causing biased zygotic sex-ratios, we find that a period of sex-specific haploid selection generally favors recombination suppression on the sex chromosomes. Suppressed recombination is favored because it allows associations to build up between haploid-beneficial alleles and the sex that experiences haploid selection most often (e.g., pollen beneficial alleles become strongly associated with the male determining region, Y or Z). Haploid selected loci can favor recombination suppression even in the absence of selective differences between male and female diploids. Overall, we expand our view of the sex-specific life cycle stages that can drive sex chromosome evolution to include gametic competition and meiotic drive. Based on our models, sex chromosomes should become enriched for genes that experience haploid selection, as is expected for genes that experience sexually antagonistic selection. Thus, we generate a number of predictions that can be evaluated in emerging sex chromosome systems.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".