Time in sympatry correlates with the strength of reproductive isolation in hybridising <i>Typha</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In North America, hybridisation between Typha angustifolia and T. latifolia results in the highly impactful T. × glauca . In Europe, where its parental taxa are also sympatric, T . × glauca is scarce, suggesting stronger reproductive isolation on this continent. Using genomic data from the two species in North America and Europe, we reconstructed their demographic histories and characterised barrier loci between them. Demographic modelling suggests that the initial contact between the two species in Europe occurred ∼800,000 years ago, indicating sympatry in that region since the Middle Pleistocene. In North America, their contact likely happened within the last centuries and was potentially driven by the human-mediated dispersal of T. angustifolia . We identified 47 candidate barrier loci between species in Europe, 6 of which are associated with reproductive functions. No barrier loci were found in North America. Our results suggest that prolonged sympatry can promote the evolution of reproductive barriers, whereas prolonged allopatry can reduce the likelihood of their development. Future studies could help determine whether time in sympatry is a predictor of the strength of reproductive isolation between hybridising taxa. Preventing invasions by hybrid taxa will require limiting the human-mediated dispersal of Typha (and other allopatric species) lacking reproductive isolation.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".