MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415638909 · doi:10.1093/evlett/qraf034

Joint test of historical vs. contemporary biogeography supports abundant center hypothesis shaping spatial patterns of self-fertilization

2025· article· en· W4415638909 on OpenAlexafffund
Mackenzie Urquhart‐Cronish, Ken Thompson, Amy L. Angert

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)BiogeographyPhylogeographySpatial ecologyPopulationSelfingBiological dispersalSpatial analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Plant reproductive assurance describes the ability of a plant to successfully reproduce in an environment that is potentially devoid of conspecifics and/or pollinators. Traditionally, studies have focused on contemporary ecology—pollinator or mate availability—driving spatial patterns in reproductive assurance; however, historical processes—post-glacial range expansion—may be an understudied alternative explanation because during range expansion, selection should favor individuals with traits promoting reproductive assurance (i.e., autonomous selfing or clonal reproduction) at the range edge. While historical tests would be rooted in phylogeographic analyses, the role of contemporary ecology can be tested indirectly using the abundant center hypothesis, where it is assumed population density decreases from the range center toward marginal habitat. We used Northern pink monkeyflower—Erythranthe (Mimulus) lewisii—a hermaphroditic, perennial, alpine plant, to concurrently investigate the role of historical range expansion and the abundant-center hypothesis using a greenhouse survey of range-wide reproductive assurance. First, we detected significant geographic variation among populations in self-fertilization and clonal propagation. Next, using genomic data and phylogeographic analyses, we identified three distinct genetic clusters and estimated the geographic location of the most likely origins of range expansion within each cluster. We then used filtered range-wide occurrence records to identify the geographic center of the range. We used our two relative measures of population distance from the range center (historical vs. contemporary) in univariate zero-inflated models to test whether historic or contemporary biogeography better explained spatial variation in reproductive assurance. We found that the probability of autonomous selfing significantly increased, on average, with distance from the inferred contemporary range center, consistent with the abundant-center hypothesis. Models of probability of clonal propagation showed statistical support for historical range expansion, but model performance metrics favored the abundant center hypothesis model. Future work can test the support for contemporary ecology shaping range-wide reproductive assurance in E. lewisii, which is linked to variation in evolutionary potential, adaptability, and population persistence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.154 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolution LettersSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207