Haplotype tagging reveals parallel formation of hybrid races in two butterfly species.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic variation segregates as linked sets of variants or haplotypes. Haplotypes and linkage are central to genetics and underpin virtually all genetic and selection analysis. Yet, genomic data often omit haplotype information due to constraints in sequencing technologies. Here, we present "haplotagging," a simple, low-cost linked-read sequencing technique that allows sequencing of hundreds of individuals while retaining linkage information. We apply haplotagging to construct megabase-size haplotypes for over 600 individual butterflies (Heliconius erato and H. melpomene), which form overlapping hybrid zones across an elevational gradient in Ecuador. Haplotagging identifies loci controlling distinctive high- and lowland wing color patterns. Divergent haplotypes are found at the same major loci in both species, while chromosome rearrangements show no parallelism. Remarkably, in both species, the geographic clines for the major wing-pattern loci are displaced by 18 km, leading to the rise of a novel hybrid morph in the center of the hybrid zone. We propose that shared warning signaling (Müllerian mimicry) may couple the cline shifts seen in both species and facilitate the parallel coemergence of a novel hybrid morph in both comimetic species. Our results show the power of efficient haplotyping methods when combined with large-scale sequencing data from natural populations.
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".