Population genomics of an emergent tri‐species hybrid zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolating barriers that drive speciation are commonly studied in the context of two-species hybrid zones. There is, however, evidence that more complex introgressive relationships are common in nature. Here, we use field observations and genomic analysis, including the sequencing and assembly of a novel reference genome, to study an emergent hybrid zone involving two colliding hybrid zones of three woodpecker species: red-breasted, red-naped, and yellow-bellied sapsuckers (Sphyrapicus ruber, S. nuchalis, and S. varius). Surveys of the area surrounding Prince George, British Columbia, Canada, show that all three species are sympatric, and Genotyping-by-Sequencing identifies hybrids from each species pair and birds with ancestry from all three species. Observations of phenotypes and genotypes of mated pairs provide evidence for assortative mating, though there is some heterospecific pairing. Hybridization is more extensive in this tri-species hybrid zone than in two di-species hybrid zones. However, there is no evidence of a hybrid swarm and admixture is constrained to contact zones, so we classify this region as a tension zone and invoke selection against hybrids as a likely mechanism maintaining species boundaries. Analysis of sapsucker age classes does not show disadvantages in hybrid survival to adulthood, so we speculate the selection upholding the tension zone may involve hybrid fecundity. Gene flow among all sapsuckers in di-species hybrid zones suggests introgression probably occurred before the formation of this tri-species hybrid zone, and might result from bridge hybridization, vagrancies, or other three-species interactions.
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".