Mechanisms of reproductive isolation between annual and perennial plants of <i>Incarvillea sinensis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quantifying the relative strength of isolating barriers is a major focus of research on plant speciation. Contrasting life histories and mating systems have the potential to limit gene exchange between closely related populations growing in sympatry. However, few studies have quantified reproductive isolating barriers between conspecific annual and perennial populations and their contributions to total reproductive isolation (RI). Incarvillea sinensis Lam. (Bignoniaceae) is an insect‐pollinated herb with largely allopatric annual and perennial populations that differ in mating systems. The perennial populations are primarily outcrossing whereas annual populations are predominantly selfing. At a rare sympatric site in northern China we estimated prezygotic and postzygotic barriers to gene exchange between annual and perennial plants and found complete RI between the two life histories. Annuals exhibited significantly higher ecogeographic isolation than perennials whereas perennials experienced more isolation through pollen–pistil interactions than annuals. Crosses between annuals and perennials demonstrated that postzygotic barriers influencing fruit and seed formation, F1 germination and survival were negligible for annuals but played a small role for perennials. However, F1 hybrids of crosses between annuals and perennials produced no pollen and their ovules were largely sterile. Our study provides insight into the relative importance of prezygotic and postzygotic isolating barriers between closely related annual and perennial populations of I. sinensis and some of these barriers could have been involved with speciation. Annuals and perennials of I. sinensis represent two biological species and thus deserve to be recognized as distinct taxonomic species.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".