Ongoing hybridization obscures phylogenetic relationships in the <i>Drosophila subquinaria</i> species complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inferring evolutionary relationships among recently diverged lineages is necessary to understand how isolating barriers produce independent lineages. Here, we investigate the phylogenetic relationships between three incompletely isolated and closely related mushroom-feeding Drosophila species. These species form the Drosophila subquinaria species complex and consist of one Eurasian species (D. transversa) and two widespread North American species (D. subquinaria and D. recens) that are sympatric in central Canada. Although patterns of pre- and post-mating isolation among these species are well characterized, previous work on their phylogenetic relationships is limited and conflicting. In this study, we generated a multi-locus data set of 29 loci from across the genome sequenced in a population sample from each species, and then, we inferred species relationships and patterns of introgression. We find strong statistical support that D. subquinaria is paraphyletic, showing that samples from the geographic region sympatric with D. recens are most closely related to D. recens, whereas samples from the geographic region allopatric with D. recens are most closely related to D. transversa. We present several lines of evidence that both incomplete lineage sorting and gene flow are causing phylogenetic discordance. We suggest that ongoing gene flow primarily from D. recens into D. subquinaria in the sympatric part of their ranges causes phylogenetic uncertainty in the evolutionary history of these species. Our results highlight how population genetic data can be used to disentangle the sources of phylogenetic discordance among closely related 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".