Data from: Evolution of haploid selection in predominantly diploid organisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractDiploid organisms manipulate the extent to which their haploid gametes experience selection. Animals typically produce sperm with a diploid complement of most proteins and RNA, limiting selection on the haploid genotype. Plants, however, exhibit extensive expression in pollen, with actively transcribed haploid genomes. Here we analyze models that track the evolution of genes that modify the strength of haploid selection to predict when evolution intensifies and when it dampens the “selective arena” within which male gametes compete for fertilization. Considering deleterious mutations, evolution leads diploid mothers to strengthen selection among haploid sperm/pollen, because this reduces the mutation load inherited by their diploid offspring. If, however, selection acts in opposite directions in haploids and diploids (“ploidally antagonistic selection”), mothers evolve to reduce haploid selection to avoid selectively amplifying alleles harmful to their offspring. Consequently, with maternal control, selection in the haploid phase either is maximized or reaches an intermediate state, depending on the deleterious mutation rate relative to the extent of ploidally antagonistic selection. By contrast, evolution generally leads diploid fathers to mask mutations in their gametes to the maximum extent possible, whenever masking (e.g., through transcript sharing) increases the average fitness of a father’s gametes. We discuss the implications of this maternal–paternal conflict over the extent of haploid selection and describe empirical studies needed to refine our understanding of haploid selection among seemingly diploid organisms.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.032 |
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".