Testing for the Genomic Footprint of Conflict Between Life Stages in an Angiosperm and Moss Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The maintenance of genetic variation by balancing selection is of considerable interest to evolutionary biologists. An important but understudied potential driver of balancing selection is antagonistic pleiotropy between diploid and haploid stages of the plant life cycle. Despite sharing a common genome, sporophytes (2n) and gametophytes (n) may undergo differential or even opposing selection. Theoretical work suggests antagonistic pleiotropy between life stages can generate balancing selection and maintain genetic variation. Despite the potential for far-reaching consequences of gametophytic selection, empirical tests of its pleiotropic effects (neutral, synergistic, or antagonistic) on sporophytes are generally lacking. Here, we examined the population genomic signals of selection across life stages in the angiosperm Rumex hastatulus and the moss Ceratodon purpureus. We compared gene expression between life stages and sexes, combined with neutral diversity statistics and the analysis of the distribution of fitness effects. In contrast to what would be predicted under balancing selection due to antagonistic pleiotropy, we found that unbiased genes between life stages were under stronger purifying selection, likely explained by a predominance of synergistic pleiotropy between life stages and strong purifying selection on broadly expressed genes. In addition, we found that 30% of candidate genes under balancing selection in R. hastatulus were located within inversion polymorphisms. Our findings provide novel insights into the genome-wide characteristics and consequences of plant gametophytic 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".