Alternative reproductive strategies explain asymmetric reinforcement of reproductive isolation in two <i>Ischnura</i> damselfly species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Theoretical and empirical studies on reinforcement have been a central focus in speciation research. Despite its significance, reinforcement in polymorphic species has received little attention, even though morphs often exhibit differences in behavior and reproductive capacity, which could drive asymmetric reinforcement. In this study, we tested for asymmetric reinforcement between morphs in the polymorphic damselflies Ischnura elegans and Ischnura graellsii , in which female morphs exhibit alternative reproductive strategies and males show a preference for the gynochrome morph. These species have formed two independent hybrid zones where reinforcement has strengthened a mechanical barrier and reproductive character displacement has shaped mating-related structures. We compared the strength of five reproductive barriers between female morphs to assess the interplay between female-limited color polymorphism and reinforcement. We detected asymmetric reinforcement in premating and postmating barriers between morphs in both hybrid zones, likely driven by their different reproductive strategies. Additionally, we observed weakening of oviposition and fertility barriers probably associated with gene flow and purging of incompatibilities. Our findings highlight that inherent asymmetry in reproductive isolation, caused by differences in female morph reproductive strategies, drive asymmetric reinforcement between morphs. Future studies should explore the cascading effects of this process and its implications for morph speciation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".