Locally Adaptive Inversions Modulate Genetic Variation at Different Geographic Scales in a Seaweed Fly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across a species range, multiple sources of environmental heterogeneity, at both small and large scales, create complex landscapes of selection, which may challenge adaptation, particularly when gene flow is high. One key to multidimensional adaptation may reside in the heterogeneity of recombination along the genome. Structural variants, like chromosomal inversions, reduce recombination, increasing linkage disequilibrium among loci at a potentially massive scale. In this study, we examined how chromosomal inversions shape genetic variation across a species range and ask how their contribution to adaptation in the face of gene flow varies across geographic scales. We sampled the seaweed fly Coelopa frigida along a bioclimatic gradient stretching across 10° of latitude, a salinity gradient, and a range of heterogeneous, patchy habitats. We generated a chromosome-level genome assembly to analyze 1,446 low-coverage whole genomes collected along those gradients. We found several large nonrecombining genomic regions, including putative inversions. In contrast to the collinear regions, inversions and low-recombining regions differentiated populations more strongly, either along an ecogeographic cline or at a fine-grained scale. These genomic regions were associated with environmental factors and adaptive phenotypes, albeit with contrasting patterns. Altogether, our results highlight the importance of recombination in shaping adaptation to environmental heterogeneity at local and large 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 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".