Data from: Testing for parallel allochronic isolation in lake-stream stickleback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of reproductive isolation (RI) is a critical step shaping progress toward speciation. In the context of ecological speciation, a critical question is the extent to which specific reproductive barriers important to RI evolve rapidly and predictably in response to environmental differences. Only reproductive barriers with these properties (importance, rapidity, predictability) will drive the diversification of species that are cohesively structured by environment type. One candidate barrier that might exhibit such properties is allochrony, whereby populations breed at different times. We studied six independent lake-stream population pairs of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus Linnaeus, 1758) that are known from genetic studies to show RI. However, the specific reproductive barriers driving this RI have proven elusive, leading to a “conundrum of missing reproductive isolation.” We here show that breeding times differ among some of the populations, but not in a consistent manner between lakes and streams. Moreover, the timing differences between lake and stream populations within each pair could account for only a small proportion of total RI measured with neutral genetic markers. Allochrony cannot solve the conundrum of missing reproductive isolation in lake-stream stickleback.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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".