The genetic architecture of repeated local adaptation to climate in distantly related plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Closely related species often use the same genes to adapt to similar environments. However, we know little about why such genes possess increased adaptive potential and whether this is conserved across deeper evolutionary lineages. Adaptation to climate presents a natural laboratory to test these ideas, as even distantly related species must contend with similar stresses. Here, we re-analyse genomic data from thousands of individuals from 25 plant species as diverged as lodgepole pine and Arabidopsis (~300 Myr). We test for genetic repeatability based on within-species associations between allele frequencies in genes and variation in 21 climate variables. Our results demonstrate significant statistical evidence for genetic repeatability across deep time that is not expected under randomness, identifying a suite of 108 gene families (orthogroups) and gene functions that repeatedly drive local adaptation to climate. This set includes many orthogroups with well-known functions in abiotic stress response. Using gene co-expression networks to quantify pleiotropy, we find that orthogroups with stronger evidence for repeatability exhibit greater network centrality and broader expression across tissues (higher pleiotropy), contrary to the 'cost of complexity' theory. These gene families may be important in helping wild and crop species cope with future climate change, representing important candidates for future study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".