A shared genetic basis for sexually antagonistic male and female adaptations in the toothed water strider
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sexual conflict can drive the divergence of male and female phenotypes and several cross-species comparative analyses have documented patterns of correlated evolution of sex-specific traits that promote the evolutionary interests of the sexes. However, male-female coevolution can be highly dynamic. Moreover, if male and female traits do not have an entirely distinct genetic basis, this can have profound effects on their coevolutionary dynamics. Here, we use water striders, a well-studied model system for sexually antagonistic coevolution, and ask whether sex-specific phenotypic adaptations covary across populations and whether they share a common developmental genetic basis. Using comparative analyses both at the population and species levels, we document an association between a derived male mate-grasping trait and a likely female anti-grasping counteradaptation in the toothed water strider Gerris odontogaster . Interestingly, in one population where males did not express their derived grasping trait, females had also regained the ancestral morphology. We then used experimental manipulation of gene expression, and show that these male and female traits are both linked to a common developmental genetic program containing Hox and sex determination genes, despite the fact that they are different structures on different segments. Our work thus suggests that the pleiotropic nature of developmental genetic programs can blur the distinction between inter- and intralocus genetic conflict.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".