Contrasting patterns of genetic diversity and differentiation across the continental disjunct range of a sexually polymorphic aquatic plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Reproductive systems enabling opportunities for self-fertilization influence population genetic structure and play a key role in colonization and genetic differentiation during range expansion. Because of their well-developed powers of dispersal, aquatic plants often have widespread disjunct geographical distributions, providing opportunities to investigate the role of reproductive systems in structuring genetic variation between parts of the range that differ in migration history and ecology. METHODS: We compared reproductive systems and spatial genetic structure of the freshwater aquatic macrophyte Sagittaria latifolia between disjunct western and eastern ranges of North America (NA). Populations of this species are most commonly either monoecious or dioecious. We examined chloroplast DNA haplotype variation to test the hypothesis that the western range of this species represents a secondary colonization from the east, and evaluated the roles of reproductive system differences and geography in structuring contemporary patterns of genetic variation at 11 polymorphic SSR (simple sequence repeat) loci. KEY RESULTS: Chloroplast haplotyping revealed a single haplotype in western NA compared to numerous haplotypes in eastern NA, consistent with a genetic bottleneck during westward migration. Estimates of genetic diversity in eastern NA populations differed significantly between reproductive systems, but this pattern was not evident in the western range. Eastern populations could be reliably assigned to genetic clusters based on their reproductive systems, whereas western populations clustered primarily by geographical location. CONCLUSIONS: The sparser distribution of aquatic habitats in the drier western range of S. latifolia, combined with secondary colonization of this region, probably cause the lower genetic diversity and increased differentiation among populations, possibly overriding the effects of reproductive system evident in the eastern portion of the range. Our findings demonstrate that the complex interplay between migratory history, reproductive systems and habitat availability plays an important role in structuring spatial patterns of genetic variation in disjunct plant 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".