No evidence for incipient speciation by selfing in North American Arabidopsis lyrata
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-fertilization inherently restricts gene flow by reducing the fraction of offspring that can be produced by inter-population matings. Therefore, mating system transitions from outcrossing to selfing could result in reproductive isolation between selfing and outcrossing lineages and provide a starting point for speciation. In newly diverged lineages, for example after a transition to selfing, further reproductive isolation can be caused by a variety of prezygotic and postzygotic mechanisms that operate before, during, and after pollination. In animals, prezygotic barriers tend to evolve faster than postzygotic ones. This is not necessarily the case for plants, for which the relative importance of post-mating, post-fertilization, and early acting post-zygotic barriers has been investigated far less. To test whether post-pollination isolation exists between populations of North American Arabidopsis lyrata that differ in breeding (self-incompatible versus self-compatible) and mating system (outcrossing versus selfing), we compared patterns of seed set after crosses made within populations, between populations of the same mating system, and between populations with different mating systems. We found no evidence for post-pollination isolation between plants from selfing populations (self-compatible, low outcrossing rates) and outcrossing populations (self-incompatible, high outcrossing rates) via either prezygotic or early-acting postzygotic mechanisms. Together with the results of other studies indicating the absence of reproductive barriers acting before and during pollination, we conclude that the transition to selfing in this study system has not led to the formation of reproductive barriers between selfing and outcrossing populations of North American A. lyrata.
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 | 0.001 | 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".