New beginnings for dead ends: polyploidy, -SSE models and the dead-end hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the mid-20th century, it has been argued by some that the transition from diploidy to polyploidy is an 'evolutionary dead end' in plants. Although this point has been debated ever since, multiple definitions of 'dead end' have been used in the polyploidy literature, without sufficient differentiation between alternative uses. SCOPE: Here, we focus on the two most common conceptions of the dead-end hypothesis currently discussed: the 'lowering diversification' hypothesis and the 'rarely successful' hypothesis. We discuss the evidence for both hypotheses, and we use a recently developed method of inferring tip diversification rates to demonstrate tests for the effect of ploidy on diversification in Solanaceae. CONCLUSIONS: We find that diversification rates in the family are not strongly correlated with ploidy or with the closely related trait of breeding system. We also outline recent work in the field that moves beyond the relatively simple question of whether polyploidy increases, decreases or does not significantly affect diversification rates in plants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".