Constraint and divergence in the evolution of male and female recombination rates in fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recombination is a fundamental feature of sexual reproduction across eukaryotes, yet recombination rates are highly variable both within and between species. In particular, sex differences in recombination rate between males and females (heterochiasmy) are more often the rule than the exception, but despite the prevalence of heterochiasmy the ultimate causes of global patterns of heterochiasmy remain unclear. Here, we assemble a comprehensive dataset of sex-specific recombination rate estimates for 61 fish species, and combine this with information on sex determination, fertilization mode, and sexual dimorphism to test competing theories for the causes and evolution of heterochiasmy. We find that sex differences in recombination rate are evolutionary labile, with frequent shifts in the direction and magnitude of heterochiasmy. This rapid turnover does not appear to be driven by simple neutral processes and is inconsistent with nonadaptive explanations for heterochiasmy, including biological sex differences in meiosis. Although patterns of heterochiasmy across the phylogeny indicate a potential role for adaptive processes, we are unable to directly link variation in heterochiasmy with proxies for sexual selection or sexual conflict across species, indicating that these effects-if present-are either subtle or complex. Finally, we show evidence for correlated rates of recombination rate evolution between males and females, indicating the potential for genetic constraints and sexual conflict over the recombination landscape.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".