MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281262067 · doi:10.1093/gbe/evac075

Local Adaptation and the Evolution of Genome Architecture in Threespine Stickleback

2022· article· en· W4281262067 on OpenAlexaff
Qiushi Li, Dorothea Lindtke, Carlos E. Rodríguez‐Ramírez, Ryo Kakioka, Hiroshi Takahashi, Atsushi Toyoda, Jun Kitano, Rachel Ehrlich, Joshua Chang Mell, Sam Yeaman

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Biology and Evolution · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologySyntenyGenomeEvolutionary biologyAdaptation (eye)SticklebackGenetic architectureLocal adaptationGeneticsGenome evolutionLineage (genetic)GeneQuantitative trait locusPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theory predicts that local adaptation should favor the evolution of a concentrated genetic architecture, where the alleles driving adaptive divergence are tightly clustered on chromosomes. Adaptation to marine versus freshwater environments in threespine stickleback has resulted in an architecture that seems consistent with this prediction: divergence among populations is mainly driven by a few genomic regions harboring multiple quantitative trait loci for environmentally adapted traits, as well as candidate genes with well-established phenotypic effects. One theory for the evolution of these "genomic islands" is that rearrangements remodel the genome to bring causal loci into tight proximity, but this has not been studied explicitly. We tested this theory using synteny analysis to identify micro- and macro-rearrangements in the stickleback genome and assess their potential involvement in the evolution of genomic islands. To identify rearrangements, we conducted a de novo assembly of the closely related tubesnout (Aulorhyncus flavidus) genome and compared this to the genomes of threespine stickleback and two other closely related species. We found that small rearrangements, within-chromosome duplications, and lineage-specific genes (LSGs) were enriched around genomic islands, and that all three chromosomes harboring large genomic islands have experienced macro-rearrangements. We also found that duplicates and micro-rearrangements are 9.9× and 2.9× more likely to involve genes differentially expressed between marine and freshwater genotypes. While not conclusive, these results are consistent with the explanation that strong divergent selection on candidate genes drove the recruitment of rearrangements to yield clusters of locally adaptive loci.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome Biology and EvolutionSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207