The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Recombination rate variation shapes barriers to introgression across butterfly genomes
Open accessAbstract
Hybridisation and introgression can dramatically alter the relationships among groups of species, leading to phylogenetic discordance across the genome and between populations. Introgression can also erode species differences over time, but selection against introgression at certain loci acts to maintain postmating species barriers. Theory predicts that species barriers made up of many loci throughout the genome should lead to a broad correlation between introgression and recombination rate, which determines the extent to which selection on deleterious foreign alleles will affect neutral alleles at physically linked loci. Here, we describe the variation in genealogical relationships across the genome among three species of Heliconius butterflies: H. melpomene (mel), H. cydno (cyd), and H. timareta (tim), using whole genomes of 92 individuals, and ask whether this variation can be explained by heterogeneous barriers to introgression. We find that species relationships vary predictably at the chromosomal scale. By quantifying recombination rate and admixture proportions, we then show that rates of introgression are predicted by variation in recombination rate. This implies that species barriers are highly polygenic, with selection acting against introgressed alleles across most of the genome. In addition, long chromosomes, which have lower recombination rates, produce stronger barriers on average than short chromosomes. Finally, we find a consistent difference between two species pairs on either side of the Andes, which suggests differences in the architecture of the species barriers. Our findings illustrate how the combined effects of hybridisation, recombination, and natural selection, acting at multitudes of loci over long periods, can dramatically sculpt the phylogenetic relationships among species.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data
DePristo, M. A., Banks, E., Poplin, R., Garimella, K. V., Maguire, J. R., Hartl, C., Philippakis, A. A., del Angel, G., Rivas, M. A., Hanna, M., et al. (2011) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.806 · Cited by 11,456
Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies
Price, A. L., Patterson, N. J., Plenge, R. M., Weinblatt, M. E., Shadick, N. A., & Reich, D. (2006) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1847 · Cited by 10,248
Application of Phylogenetic Networks in Evolutionary Studies
Huson, D. H., & Bryant, D. (2006) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msj030 · Cited by 8,830
Structural absorption by barbule microstructures of super black bird of paradise feathers
McCoy, D. E., Feo, T., Harvey, T. A., & Prum, R. O. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-02088-w · Cited by 7,424
A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome
Green, R. E., Krause, J., Briggs, A. W., Maricic, T., Stenzel, U., Kircher, M., Patterson, N., Li, H., Zhai, W., Fritz, M. H.-Y., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1188021 · Cited by 4,318
Genetics and the Origin of Species
(1952) · AIBS Bulletin · doi:10.1093/aibsbulletin/2.2.14-b · Cited by 3,935
Neighbor-Net: An Agglomerative Method for the Construction of Phylogenetic Networks
Bryant, D. (2003) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msh018 · Cited by 2,190
A linear complexity phasing method for thousands of genomes
Delaneau, O., Marchini, J., & Zagury, J.-F. (2012) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1785 · Cited by 1,850
Genetics and the Origin of Species
Schmidt, K. P., & Dobzhansky, T. (1938) · Copeia · doi:10.2307/1435536 · Cited by 1,732
Cited by
Widespread selection and gene flow shape the genomic landscape during a radiation of monkeyflowers
Stankowski, S., Chase, M. A., Fuiten, A. M., Rodrigues, M. F., Ralph, P. L., & Streisfeld, M. A. (2019) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000391 · Cited by 134
Cicconardi, F., Milanetti, E., Pinheiro de Castro, E. C., Mazo-Vargas, A., Van Belleghem, S. M., Ruggieri, A. A., Rastas, P., Hanly, J., Evans, E., Jiggins, C. D., et al. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-41412-5 · Cited by 81
Self-citationRe-evaluating Homoploid Reticulate Evolution in Helianthus Sunflowers
Owens, G. L., Huang, K., Todesco, M., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2023) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msad013 · Cited by 39
Choi, J. Y., Purugganan, M., & Stacy, E. A. (2020) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msz259 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Martin, S. H., Davey, J. W., Salazar, C., & Jiggins, C. D.
- Venue
- PLOS Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2019-02-07
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e2006288
- ISSN
- 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7885
- OpenAlex
- W2950701710
- Cited by
- 320
- References
- 109
- FWCI
- 20.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Recombination rate variation shapes barriers to introgression across butterfly genomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006288
- The paper
- Martin, S. H., Davey, J. W., Salazar, C., & Jiggins, C. D. (2019). Recombination rate variation shapes barriers to introgression across butterfly genomes. PLOS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006288
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.