Allopolyploid speciation in primroses of the Auricula section (genus Primula, subgenus Auriculastrum)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, we show that the hexaploid primroses (6x=66) of section Auricula arose from crosses between species of Dodecatheon (4x=44) and of Primula, section Cuneifolia (2x=22), that came into secondary contact in the Alps. Genetic studies at codominant nuclear markers (enzyme loci) indicate that the most likely parental species of the Auricula taxa were D. pulchellum, D. frigidum and P. cuneifolia. Among the alleles detected in Auricula species, 9 were found in a diploid population of P.cuneifolia from Siberia, 17 in allotetraploid D.\npulchellum s.l./D. frigidum respectively from NW Canada and Alaska, whereas few were shared by both P .cuneifolia and Dodecatheon spp. Nine missing alleles were detected; their relative low frequency (about 1/4 of the total alleles) suggests that the Auricula section had a recent origin, during one of the last Ice Ages. We suggest that triploid P.cuneifolia x Dodecatheon spp. hybrids acquired sexuality by a chromosome doubling, allowing normal meiosis. Data from cpDNA indicate D.pulchellum s.l./D.frigidum as the maternal species of the Auricula complex. The putative parental species are now extinct from all Europe, possibly due to competitive exclusion by their allohexaploid derivatives, able to exploit a wide range of environments, from sea-level (i.e. P.palinuri) up to 3000m.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".