ライフサイエンスコーパス: allopatric

1 by natural selection indirectly refutes the allopatric alternative.

2 Males from both an allopatric and a sympatric population produce more sperm

3 ests that species formation is predominantly allopatric and involves host expansion followed by local

4 genome-wide differentiation between pairs of allopatric and sympatric ecotypes.

5 o flower in early spring; they are shared by allopatric and sympatric population pairs.

6 o flower in early spring; they are shared by allopatric and sympatric population pairs.

7 tric morphometric methods for specimens from allopatric and sympatric populations from two geographic

8 n the capacity of autonomous selfing in both allopatric and sympatric populations of two closely rela

9 addition, comparing haplotype frequencies in allopatric and sympatric populations, suggest locale spe

10 aphic variation in floral divergence between allopatric and sympatric populations.

11 e indicates that, under suitable conditions, allopatric and sympatric speciation can occur with simil

12 Exploiters may also drive allopatric (between-population) diversification by creat

13 atterns are very similar between widespread, allopatric clades, it is unlikely that selective pressur

14 ion) and geographic variation (parapatric or allopatric colour variation), because these two patterns

15 ultiple, independent reproductively isolated allopatric communities displaying convergently evolved c

16 an for more closely related but historically allopatric congeners.

17 butional fragmentation, isolation leading to allopatric differentiation, and secondary contact among

18 markers were used to examine the effects of allopatric divergence and habitat on levels of gene flow

19 DNA phylogeny corroborates the hypothesis of allopatric divergence and multiple invasions, and when c

20 mplete geographical partitioning, suggesting allopatric divergence and secondary admixture.

21 ixture are specifically predicted to inhibit allopatric divergence and speciation [9].

22 e show that these populations have undergone allopatric divergence and then secondary contact without

23 This supports allopatric divergence in situ being the precursor of spe

24 ispersal across barriers, thereby increasing allopatric diversification and contributing to the latit

25 In contrast, allopatric diversity was greatly increased as a result o

26 These subspecies are allopatric except for two known regions of sympatry in T

27 the vulnerabilities of closely related, but allopatric, forest species.

28 iew receded during the Modern Synthesis when allopatric (geographic) models of speciation were integr

29 hen two previously geographically separated (allopatric) groups meet after having evolved partial pos

30 planitibia from Maui are two closely related allopatric Hawaiian picture-winged Drosophila that produ

31 Tuberculosis cases that did occur in allopatric hosts disproportionately involved high-risk i

32 erial phylotypes than the gut communities of allopatric hosts.

33 speciation is largely sympatric, rather than allopatric, in nature.

34 beria is identified as an area of successive allopatric innovations that apparently spread to Europe,

35 iation is not driven by vicariance, and that allopatric isolation following dispersal may be involved

36 ression of diversification starting with the allopatric isolation of Atlantic Arctic and Antarctic po

37 ergence appears to have resulted from either allopatric isolation; a recent, rare long-distance dispe

38 , in a stabilizing fitness landscape, of two allopatric lineages leads to incompatibilities.

39 ional overlap between the gut microbiotas of allopatric mammalian populations decayed exponentially w

40 mparing the gut microbiotas of sympatric and allopatric mammalian populations provided insights into

41 ent hosts and biogeographic factors (such as allopatric migrations, geographic separation, and isolat

42 settle the debate over the prevalence of the allopatric mode of speciation.

43 Second, we rejected a strict allopatric model of divergence without gene flow; instea

44 The strictly allopatric model of speciation makes definable predictio

45 n nearby solitary populations, suggesting an allopatric origin for adaptive variants and selection pr

46 pairing resulted in higher transmission than allopatric pairing, which suggests that local adaptation

47 h more likely to spread in sympatric than in allopatric patient populations.

48 reproductive isolation, and that an earlier allopatric phase is highly unlikely.

49 species were present in low frequency in one allopatric population each of I. fulva and I. hexagona.

50 postzygotic reproductive isolation even when allopatric populations adapt to identical environments,

51 These processes act within allopatric populations and may accelerate their divergen

52 lution drives rapid genetic divergence among allopatric populations and thereby acts as an important

53 Geographical expansion creates allopatric populations and thereby could promote diversi

54 tion occurs; yet genetic differences between allopatric populations are maintained.

55 and D. capensis, but morphologically similar allopatric populations are not monophyletic, indicating

56 pattern of reproductive barrier formation in allopatric populations has received much less attention

57 h a focus on 1) their sympatric range and 2) allopatric populations in N and S America and southern E

58 tact between previously genetically isolated allopatric populations of Bd may have allowed recombinat

59 assayed the gut communities of sympatric and allopatric populations of chimpanzees, bonobos, and gori

60 14 populations of H. annuus ssp. texanus, 14 allopatric populations of H. annuus, and three populatio

61 lis ssp. cucumerifolius were found in the 14 allopatric populations of H. annuus.

62 Comparisons between sympatric and allopatric populations of H. melpomene, H. cydno, and H.

63 may play a diversifying role when previously allopatric populations rejoin.

64 f sympatric populations with randomly paired allopatric populations revealed that the observed sympat

65 servations of enhanced premating barriers in allopatric populations suggest that sexual selection dri

66 y were significantly less likely than nearby allopatric populations to mate with heterospecific males

67 resource use differences were found between allopatric populations, and comparisons of sympatric pop

68 2 h critical photoperiod difference between allopatric populations, and then tested whether the same

69 variation was also assessed in 13 additional allopatric populations.

70 admixture in parapatric populations than in allopatric populations.

71 s and the capacity to self autonomously than allopatric populations.

72 P. parva also had a smaller niche than their allopatric populations.

73 effect after the onset of gene flow between allopatric populations.

74 Danish hybrid zone border (contact) and from allopatric populations.

75 ies as a by-product of genetic divergence in allopatric populations.

76 tering rapid divergence of such traits among allopatric populations.

77 olation can quickly arise from diversifying (allopatric) postcopulatory sexual selection.

78 giant Galapagos tortoises represent a rapid allopatric radiation and further exemplify evolutionary

79 ation pervasively evolves indirectly between allopatric replicate populations that adapt to the same

80 iversification, and metabolomic evidence for allopatric segregation in plants has never been reported

81 sites occupying separate geographical areas (allopatric) showed no such significant difference.

82 ow this remarkable diversity arose, although allopatric speciation and ecological adaptation are thou

83 Since the recognition that allopatric speciation can be induced by large-scale reco

84 The overall picture is of two allopatric speciation events that occurred quite near on

85 , and which are defined here as analogous to allopatric speciation in animals, or by acquiring new ni

86 ence of evolutionary processes necessary for allopatric speciation in sexual microbes.

87 mics in S. islandicus exposes the process of allopatric speciation in thermophilic Archaea and brings

88 n being directly linked to landscape change, allopatric speciation is initiated to a greater extent b

89 echanisms would seem to favor sympatric over allopatric speciation models to explain the diversity an

90 phyte partners acted as a barrier driving an allopatric speciation of extant UCYN-A lineages.

91 ility of shallow marine environments and via allopatric speciation on land.

92 s and sphingophilous species are products of allopatric speciation on the diploid level.

93 (1) the interspecific hypothesis proposes an allopatric speciation scenario for the parasite, whereas

94 The theory of allopatric speciation suggests that reproductive barrier

95 logical isolation arising as a by-product of allopatric speciation, (ii) ethological isolation develo

96 y considering refuges as the main drivers of allopatric speciation, but instead by suggesting that hi

97 d consistent with a species neutral model of allopatric speciation, colonisation and local extinction

98 develop a dynamic null model of assembly by allopatric speciation, colonisation and local extinction

99 Allopatric speciation, the divergence of species resulti

100 robable intermediate stage in the process of allopatric speciation.

101 e explained more simply by the null model of allopatric speciation.

102 netic divergence of isolated populations and allopatric speciation.

103 ewed as much less plausible than geographic (allopatric) speciation.

104 e to "animate" the process of geographic, or allopatric, speciation.

105 ach, together with the comparison to the two allopatric species D. mauritiana and D. sechellia, allow

106 st as species diversity, possibly because of allopatric species gaining improved defense with compoun

107 contributing to hybrid male sterility in the allopatric species pair Drosophila persimilis and D. pse

108 h of premating and postmating barriers in an allopatric species pair of the endangered Sonoran topmin

109 f elevated dXY are observed in sympatric and allopatric species pairs, suggesting that recent gene fl

110 When allopatric species with incomplete prezygotic isolation

111 condary sexual traits among closely related, allopatric species.

112 genus, Erynnis, that involves well-diverged allopatric species.

113 aplotypes in a population initiated with two allopatric strains of Drosophila pseudoobscura, BogER fr

114 ther the antagonism was between sympatric or allopatric strains.

115 basis of color pattern variation between two allopatric subspecies of Drosophila malerkotliana, a wid

116 mination between sympatric taxa than between allopatric taxa has been attributed to the strengthening

117 ndividuals from a population of H. melpomene allopatric to H. cydno court and mate with H. cydno more

118 dictions for distinguishing geographic mode (allopatric versus sympatric) of divergence.

119 Furthermore, tests of the frequency of allopatric versus sympatric/parapatric divergence (that

120 ve as a bridge for gene flow among otherwise allopatric wild taxa.

121 ope signatures to show that recently evolved allopatric wintering populations of European blackcaps S

122 Further diversification was mainly allopatric, with repeated more recent colonization of lo