Repeatability of Adaptive Radiation Depends on Spatial Scale: Regional Versus Global Replicates of Stickleback in Lake Versus Stream Habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The repeatability of adaptive radiation is expected to be scale-dependent, with determinism decreasing as greater spatial separation among "replicates" leads to their increased genetic and ecological independence. Threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) provide an opportunity to test whether this expectation holds for the early stages of adaptive radiation-their diversification in freshwater ecosystems has been replicated many times. To better understand the repeatability of that adaptive radiation, we examined the influence of geographic scale on levels of parallel evolution by quantifying phenotypic and genetic divergence between lake and stream stickleback pairs sampled at regional (Vancouver Island) and global (North America and Europe) scales. We measured phenotypes known to show lake-stream divergence and used reduced representation genome-wide sequencing to estimate genetic divergence. We assessed the scale dependence of parallel evolution by comparing effect sizes from multivariate models and also the direction and magnitude of lake-stream divergence vectors. At the phenotypic level, parallelism was greater at the regional than the global scale. At the genetic level, putative selected loci showed greater lake-stream parallelism at the regional than the global scale. Generally, the level of parallel evolution was low at both scales, except for some key univariate traits. Divergence vectors were often orthogonal, highlighting possible ecological and genetic constraints on parallel evolution at both scales. Overall, our results confirm that the repeatability of adaptive radiation decreases at increasing spatial scales. We suggest that greater environmental heterogeneity at larger scales imposes different selection regimes, thus generating lower repeatability of adaptive radiation at larger spatial scales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".