Studies on Mating Preference and Productivity in Drosophila ananassae and D. pallidosa and Their Hybrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During speciation different kinds of reproductive barriers originate to preclude gene flow between diverging populations. Reproductive isolation or barriers to gene flow can be categorized by the temporal nature of their effect: pre-zygotic barriers occur before fertilization and post-zygotic barriers occur after fertilization. In this study, we studied each components of reproductive isolation between D. ananassae and D. pallidosa, including both pre-zygotic and post-zygotic barriers. Because it might be possible that by dissecting these barriers one can get the answers of many unresolved questions related to the process of speciation of these two sibling species. We reported premating isolation because females of both D. ananassae and D. pallidosa were more discriminative for mating against the alien males rather than conspecific males, and this discrimination was much stronger in case of D. ananassae females for being the ancestral and cosmopolitan species. We also did not find any decrease in the production of progeny or viable offspring in comparison to conspecific males, indicating a lack of postmating prezygotic isolating barriers. Further, there is no complete lack of intrinsic post-zygotic isolation between these species or not complete presence of post-zygotic isolation, as both the hybrid sons were producing less number of progeny in comparison to all the crosses but it is near to significant but not significant and this is contrasting to the results of a previous study.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".