MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809916710 · doi:10.1111/mec.14782

Genomic parallelism and lack thereof in contrasting systems of three‐spined sticklebacks

2018· article· en· W2809916710 on OpenAlexaff
Shenglin Liu, Anne‐Laure Ferchaud, Peter Grønkjær, Rasmus Nygaard, Michael M. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersInterregDanmarks Frie ForskningsfondVillum Fonden
KeywordsGasterosteusBiologySticklebackParallel evolutionParallelism (grammar)PopulationEvolutionary biologyAdaptive strategiesEcologyGeneticsGenePhylogenetic treeDemographyFisheryComputer scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Parallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parallel evolution and the extent to which it involves gene reuse have attracted much interest. Whereas it has theoretically been predicted under which circumstances gene reuse is expected, empirical studies that directly compare systems showing high and low parallelism are rare. Three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), where freshwater populations have been independently founded by ancestral marine populations, represent prime examples of phenotypic and genomic parallelism, but cases exist where parallelism is low. Based on RAD (restriction site associated DNA) sequencing, we analysed SNPs and chromosome inversions in populations in Denmark and Greenland showing low and high parallelism, respectively. We identified parallelism across freshwater populations in Greenland at genomic regions previously identified to be associated with marine-freshwater divergence. These same markers also separated Danish marine and freshwater sticklebacks, albeit to a weaker extent. Hence, parallelism was not absent in Denmark but possibly constrained by spatially and temporally varying selection. Divergence time estimates found one Danish freshwater population to be much older than the others. It also deviated strongly with respect to parallelism and may represent earlier postglacial colonization based on a different pool of standing variation and eliciting different adaptive responses to freshwater conditions. These findings provide empirical support to previous suggestions that the time since replicate populations had access to a common pool of standing variation is a major factor determining gene reuse. At last, based on the observed parallelism in the Greenlandic system we discuss the predictability of adaptive responses in newly established populations.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations73
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207