Limited phenological and pollinator-mediated isolation among selfing and outcrossing <i>Arabidopsis lyrata</i> populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transitions from outcrossing to selfing have been a frequent evolutionary shift in plants and clearly play a role in species divergence. However, many questions remain about the initial mechanistic basis of reproductive isolation during the evolution of selfing. For instance, how important are pre-zygotic pre-pollination mechanisms (e.g. changes in phenology and pollinator visitation) in maintaining reproductive isolation between newly arisen selfing populations and their outcrossing ancestors? To test whether changes in phenology and pollinator visitation isolate selfing populations of Arabidopsis lyrata from outcrossing populations, we conducted a common garden experiment with plants from selfing and outcrossing populations as well as their between-population hybrids. Specifically, we asked whether there was isolation between outcrossing and selfing plants and their between-population hybrids through differences in (1) the timing or intensity of flowering; and/or (2) pollinator visitation. We found that phenology largely overlapped between plants from outcrossing and selfing populations. There were also no differences in pollinator preference related to mating system. Additionally, pollinators preferred to visit flowers on the same plant rather than exploring nearby plants, creating a large opportunity for self-fertilization. Overall, this suggests that pre-zygotic pre-pollination mechanisms do not strongly reproductively isolate plants from selfing and outcrossing populations of Arabidopsis lyrata .
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".