Data from: Parting ways: Parasite release in nature leads to sex-specific evolution of defense
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluate the extent to which males and females evolve along similar or different trajectories in response to the same environmental shift. Specifically, we use replicate experimental introductions in nature to consider how release from a key parasite (Gyrodactylus) generates similar or different defense evolution in male versus female guppies (Poecilia reticulata). After 8-12 generations of evolution, guppies were collected from the ancestral (parasite still present) and derived (parasite now absent) populations and bred for two generations in the laboratory to control for non-genetic effects. These F2 guppies were then individually infected with Gyrodactylus and infection dynamics were monitored on each fish. We found that parasite release in nature led to sex-specific evolutionary responses: males did not show much evolution of resistance, whereas females showed the evolution of increased resistance. Given that male guppies in the ancestral population had greater resistance to Gyrodactylus than did females, evolution in the derived populations led to reduction of sexual dimorphism in resistance. We argue that previous selection for high resistance in males constrained (relative to females) further evolution of the trait. We advocate more experiments considering sex-specific evolutionary responses to environmental change.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.015 |
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".