Data for: The genetic basis of floral mechanical isolation between two hummingbird-pollinated Neotropical understory herbs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Floral divergence can contribute to reproductive isolation among plant lineages, and thus provides an opportunity to study the genetics of speciation, including the number, effect size, mode of action, and interactions of quantitative trait loci (QTL). Moreover, flowers represent suites of functionally interrelated traits, but it is unclear to what extent the phenotypic integration of the flower is underlain by a shared genetic architecture, which could facilitate or constrain correlated evolution of floral traits. Here, we examine the genetic architecture of floral morphological traits involved in an evolutionary switch from bill to forehead pollen placement between two species of hummingbird-pollinated Neotropical understory herbs that are reproductively isolated by these floral differences. For the majority of traits, we find multiple QTL of relatively small effect spread throughout the genome. We also find substantial colocalization and alignment of effects of QTL underlying different floral traits that function together to promote outcrossing and reduce heterospecific pollen transfer. Our results are consistent with adaptive pleiotropy or linkage of many coadapted genes, either of which could have facilitated a response to correlated selection and helped to stabilize divergent phenotypes in the face of low levels of hybridization. Moreover, our results indicate that floral mechanical isolation can be consistent with an infinitesimal model of adaptation.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.080 | 0.043 |
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".