Travel Tales of a Worldwide Weed: Genomic Signatures of Plantago major L. Reveal Distinct Genotypic Groups With Links to Colonial Trade Routes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retracing pathways of historical species introductions is fundamental to understanding the factors involved in the successful colonization and spread, centuries after a species' establishment in an introduced range. Numerous plants have been introduced to regions outside their native ranges both intentionally and accidentally by European voyagers and early colonists making transoceanic journeys; however, records are scarce to document this. We use genotyping-by-sequencing and genotype-likelihood methods on the selfing, global weed, Plantago major , collected from 50 populations worldwide to investigate how patterns of genomic diversity are distributed among populations of this global weed. Although genomic differentiation among populations is found to be low, we identify six unique genotype groups showing very little sign of admixture and low degree of outcrossing among them. We show that genotype groups are latitudinally restricted, and that more than one successful genotype colonized and spread into the introduced ranges. With the exception of New Zealand, only one genotype group is present in the Southern Hemisphere. Three of the most prevalent genotypes present in the native Eurasian range gave rise to introduced populations in the Americas, Africa, Australia, and New Zealand, which could lend support to the hypothesis that P. major was unknowlingly dispersed by early European colonists. Dispersal of multiple successful genotypes is a likely reason for success. Genomic signatures and phylogeographic methods can provide new perspectives on the drivers behind the historic introductions and the successful colonization of introduced species, contributing to our understanding of the role of genomic variation for successful establishment of introduced 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".