Moths passing in the night: Phenological and genomic divergences within a forest pest complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Temporal separation of reproductive timing can contribute to species diversification both through allochronic speciation and later reinforcement of species boundaries. Such phenological differences are an enigmatic component of evolutionary divergence between two major forest defoliator species of the spruce budworm complex: Choristoneura fumiferana and C. occidentalis . While these species interbreed freely in laboratory settings, natural hybridization rates have not been reliably quantified due to their indistinguishable morphology. To assess whether temporal isolation is contributing to reproductive isolation, we collected adult individuals throughout their expected zone of sympatry in western Canada at 10‐day intervals over two successive years, assigning taxonomic identities using thousands of single nucleotide polymorphisms. We found unexpectedly broad sympatry between C. fumiferana and C. occidentalis biennis and substantial overlap of regional flight periods. However, flight period divergence was much more apparent on a location‐by‐location basis, highlighting the importance of considering spatial scale in these analyses. Phenological comparisons were further complicated by the biennial life cycle of C. o. biennis , the main subspecies of C. occidentalis in the region, and the occasional occurrence of the annually breeding subspecies C. o. occidentalis . Nonetheless, we demonstrate that biennialism is not a likely contributor to reproductive isolation within the species complex. Overall, interspecific F 1 hybrids comprised 2.9% of sequenced individuals, confirming the genomic distinctiveness of C. fumiferana and C. occidentalis , while also showing incomplete reproductive isolation of lineages. Finally, we used F ST ‐based outlier and genotype–environment association analyses to identify several genomic regions under putative divergent selection. These regions were disproportionately located on the Z linkage region of C. fumiferana , and contained genes, particularly antifreeze proteins, that are likely to be associated with overwintering success and diapause. In addition to temporal isolation, we conclude that other mechanisms, including ecologically mediated selection, are contributing to evolutionary divergence within the spruce budworm species complex.
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 | 0.001 | 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".