Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining how and how often asexual lineages emerge within sexual species is central to our understanding of sex-asex transitions and the long-term maintenance of sex. Asexuality can arise "by transmission" from an existing asexual lineage to a new one, through different types of crosses. The occurrence of these crosses, cryptic sex, variation in ploidy and recombination within asexuals greatly complicates the study of sex-asex transitions, as they preclude the use of standard phylogenetic methods and genetic distance metrics. In this study we show how to overcome these challenges by developing new approaches to investigate the origin of the various asexual lineages of the brine shrimp Artemia parthenogenetica. We use a large sample of asexuals, including all known polyploids, and their sexual relatives. We combine flow cytometry with mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data. We develop new genetic distance measures and methods to compare various scenarios describing the origin of the different lineages. We find that all diploid and polyploid A. parthenogenetica likely arose within the last 80,000 years through successive and nested hybridization events that involved backcrosses with different sexual species. All A. parthenogenetica have the same common ancestor and therefore likely carry the same asexuality gene(s) and reproduce by automixis. These findings radically change our view of sex-asex transitions in this group, and show the importance of considering asexuality "by transmission" scenarios. The methods developed are applicable to many other asexual taxa.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".