The microevolutionary response to male‐limited X‐chromosome evolution in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i> reflects macroevolutionary patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to its hemizygous inheritance and role in sex determination, the X-chromosome is expected to play an important role in the evolution of sexual dimorphism and to be enriched for sexually antagonistic genetic variation. By forcing the X-chromosome to only be expressed in males over >40 generations, we changed the selection pressures on the X to become similar to those experienced by the Y. This releases the X from any constraints arising from selection in females and should lead to specialization for male fitness, which could occur either via direct effects of X-linked loci or trans-regulation of autosomal loci by the X. We found evidence of masculinization via up-regulation of male-benefit sexually antagonistic genes and down-regulation of X-linked female-benefit genes. Potential artefacts of the experimental evolution protocol are discussed and cannot be wholly discounted, leading to several caveats. Interestingly, we could detect evidence of microevolutionary changes consistent with previously documented macroevolutionary patterns, such as changes in expression consistent with previously established patterns of sexual dimorphism, an increase in the expression of metabolic genes related to mito-nuclear conflict and evidence that dosage compensation effects can be rapidly altered. These results confirm the importance of the X in the evolution of sexual dimorphism and as a source for sexually antagonistic genetic variation and demonstrate that experimental evolution can be a fruitful method for testing theories of sex chromosome evolution.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".