MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391275581 · doi:10.1093/evlett/qrae002

Mating environments mediate the evolution of behavioral isolation during ecological speciation

2024· article· en· W4391275581 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAssortative matingMatingReproductive isolationEcological speciationBiologyGenetic algorithmEcologyEvolutionary biologyMating preferencesEcological selectionMating systemMate choiceSelection (genetic algorithm)PopulationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of behavioral isolation is often the first step toward speciation. While past studies show that behavioral isolation will sometimes evolve as a by-product of divergent ecological selection, we lack a more nuanced understanding of factors that may promote or hamper its evolution. The environment in which mating occurs may be important in mediating whether behavioral isolation evolves for two reasons. Ecological speciation could occur as a direct outcome of different sexual interactions being favored in different mating environments. Alternatively, mating environments may vary in the constraint they impose on traits underlying mating interactions, such that populations evolving in a "constraining" mating environment would be less likely to evolve behavioral isolation than populations evolving in a less constraining mating environment. In the latter, mating environment is not the direct cause of behavioral isolation but rather permits its evolution only if other drivers are present. We test these ideas with a set of 28 experimental fly populations, each of which evolved under one of two mating environments and one of two larval environments. Counter to the prediction of ecological speciation by mating environment, behavioral isolation was not maximal between populations evolved in different mating environments. Nonetheless, mating environment was an important factor as behavioral isolation evolved among populations from one mating environment but not among populations from the other. Though one mating environment was conducive to the evolution of behavioral isolation, it was not sufficient: assortative mating only evolved between populations adapting to different-larval environments within that mating environment, indicating a role for ecological speciation. Intriguingly, the mating environment that promoted behavioral isolation is characterized by less sexual conflict compared to the other mating environment. Our results suggest that mating environments play a key role in mediating ecological speciation via other axes of divergent selection.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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