Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Genetics and Genomics›Reproductive Isolation
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Reproductive Isolation

Genetics and Genomics · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-29 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 4 min read

Mechanisms that prevent different populations from exchanging genes (gene flow), resulting in or maintaining genetic speciation.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (695 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

Mechanisms that prevent different populations from exchanging genes (gene flow), resulting in or maintaining genetic speciation. It can either prevent mating to take place or ensure that any offspring produced is either inviable or sterile, thereby preventing further reproduction.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Isolation, Reproductive; Isolations, Reproductive; Reproductive Isolations; Hybridization Barriers; Hybridization Barrier; Barrier, Hybridization; Barriers, Hybridization.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Biological Evolution

Related concepts

  • Gene Flow
  • Genetic Speciation
  • Reproduction

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 1,520 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Reproductive Isolation” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 554 of them (36.4%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 974 records.

Reviews account for 108 records (7.1%) and meta-analyses for 5. Randomized controlled trials number 0 (0.0%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 0 records; 2000-2009: 0 records; 2010-2019: 974 records; 2020 onward: 554 records0through 199902000-20099742010-20195542020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19990
2000-20090
2010-2019974
2020 onward554
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 7.1 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.3 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 0.0 percentReviews7.1% (108)Meta-analyses0.3% (5)Randomized controlled trials0.0% (0)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 1,520 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews1087.1%
Meta-analyses50.3%
Randomized controlled trials00.0%

Method: PubMed query "Reproductive Isolation"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.

Reading the evidence in genetics and genomics

Genetic findings vary widely in strength. A variant linked to a condition in one study may not replicate in other ancestries, and most common variants have small effects that are meaningful only in aggregate. Studies of rare, high-impact variants can support strong causal claims about a gene, while association studies describe statistical links that need functional and independent replication. Check the sample size, the ancestry of participants, whether results were replicated, and whether a laboratory or clinical outcome was actually measured.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Speciation and introgression between Mimulus nasutus and Mimulus guttatus
Brandvain Y, Kenney AM, Flagel L, Coop G, Sweigart AL
2014Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
232cc by
PMID 24967630 · DOI · PMC4072524
Paternally expressed imprinted genes establish postzygotic hybridization barriers in Arabidopsis thaliana
Wolff P, Jiang H, Wang G, Santos-González J, Köhler C
2015Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
109cc by
PMID 26344545 · DOI · PMC4589659
Reproductive isolation of hybrid populations driven by genetic incompatibilities
Schumer M, Cui R, Rosenthal GG, Andolfatto P
2015Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
100cc by
PMID 25768654 · DOI · PMC4359097
Ancient DNA reveals reproductive barrier despite shared Avar-period culture
Wang K, Tobias B, Pany-Kucera D, Berner M, Eggers S, Gnecchi-Ruscone GA, et al.
2025Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
24cc by
PMID 39814885 · DOI · PMC11864967

Speciation and introgression between Mimulus nasutus and Mimulus guttatus [1]

Research article Brandvain Y, Kenney AM, Flagel L, Coop G, Sweigart AL · · 2014 · cited 232 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Mimulus guttatus and M.
Closing excerpt
guttatus.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (149 words)

Mimulus guttatus and M. nasutus are an evolutionary and ecological model sister species pair differentiated by ecology, mating system, and partial reproductive isolation. Despite extensive research on this system, the history of divergence and differentiation in this sister pair is unclear. We present and analyze a population genomic data set which shows that M. nasutus budded from a central Californian M. guttatus population within the last 200 to 500 thousand years. In this time, the M. nasutus genome has accrued genomic signatures of the transition to predominant selfing, including an elevated proportion of nonsynonymous variants, an accumulation of premature stop codons, and extended levels of linkage disequilibrium. Despite clear biological differentiation, we document genomic signatures of ongoing, bidirectional introgression. We observe a negative relationship between the recombination rate and divergence between M. nasutus and sympatric M. guttatus samples, suggesting that selection acts against M. nasutus ancestry in M. guttatus.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 24967630 · DOI · PMC4072524

Paternally expressed imprinted genes establish postzygotic hybridization barriers in Arabidopsis thaliana [2]

Research article Wolff P, Jiang H, Wang G, Santos-González J, Köhler C · · 2015 · cited 109 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic phenomenon causing parent-of-origin specific differential expression of maternally and paternally inherited alleles.
Closing excerpt
Our work reveals that a subset of PEGs maintains functional roles in the inbreeding plant Arabidopsis that become evident upon deregulated expression.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (118 words)

Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic phenomenon causing parent-of-origin specific differential expression of maternally and paternally inherited alleles. While many imprinted genes have been identified in plants, the functional roles of most of them are unknown. In this study, we systematically examine the functional requirement of paternally expressed imprinted genes (PEGs) during seed development in Arabidopsis thaliana. While none of the 15 analyzed peg mutants has qualitative or quantitative abnormalities of seed development, we identify three PEGs that establish postzygotic hybridization barriers in the endosperm, revealing that PEGs have a major role as speciation genes in plants. Our work reveals that a subset of PEGs maintains functional roles in the inbreeding plant Arabidopsis that become evident upon deregulated expression.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 26344545 · DOI · PMC4589659

Reproductive isolation of hybrid populations driven by genetic incompatibilities [3]

Research article Schumer M, Cui R, Rosenthal GG, Andolfatto P · · 2015 · cited 100 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Despite its role in homogenizing populations, hybridization has also been proposed as a means to generate new species.
Closing excerpt
Intriguingly, several known hybrid species exhibit patterns of reproductive isolation consistent with the predictions of our model.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (197 words)

Despite its role in homogenizing populations, hybridization has also been proposed as a means to generate new species. The conceptual basis for this idea is that hybridization can result in novel phenotypes through recombination between the parental genomes, allowing a hybrid population to occupy ecological niches unavailable to parental species. Here we present an alternative model of the evolution of reproductive isolation in hybrid populations that occurs as a simple consequence of selection against genetic incompatibilities. Unlike previous models of hybrid speciation, our model does not incorporate inbreeding, or assume that hybrids have an ecological or reproductive fitness advantage relative to parental populations. We show that reproductive isolation between hybrids and parental species can evolve frequently and rapidly under this model, even in the presence of substantial ongoing immigration from parental species and strong selection against hybrids. An interesting prediction of our model is that replicate hybrid populations formed from the same pair of parental species can evolve reproductive isolation from each other. This non-adaptive process can therefore generate patterns of species diversity and relatedness that resemble an adaptive radiation. Intriguingly, several known hybrid species exhibit patterns of reproductive isolation consistent with the predictions of our model.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 25768654 · DOI · PMC4359097

Ancient DNA reveals reproductive barrier despite shared Avar-period culture [4]

Research article Wang K, Tobias B, Pany-Kucera D, Berner M, Eggers S, Gnecchi-Ruscone GA, et al. · · 2025 · cited 24 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
After a long-distance migration, Avars with Eastern Asian ancestry arrived in Eastern Central Europe in 567 to 568 CE and encountered groups with very different European ancestry1,2.
Closing excerpt
Mobility between sites was mostly due to female exogamy pointing to different marriage networks as the main driver of the maintenance of the genetic barrier.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (231 words)

After a long-distance migration, Avars with Eastern Asian ancestry arrived in Eastern Central Europe in 567 to 568 CE and encountered groups with very different European ancestry1,2. We used ancient genome-wide data of 722 individuals and fine-grained interdisciplinary analysis of large seventh- to eighth-century CE neighbouring cemeteries south of Vienna (Austria) to address the centuries-long impact of this encounter1,2. We found that even 200 years after immigration, the ancestry at one site (Leobersdorf) remained dominantly East Asian-like, whereas the other site (Mödling) shows local, European-like ancestry. These two nearby sites show little biological relatedness, despite sharing a distinctive late-Avar culture3,4. We reconstructed six-generation pedigrees at both sites including up to 450 closely related individuals, allowing per-generation demographic profiling of the communities. Despite different ancestry, these pedigrees together with large networks of distant relatedness show absence of consanguinity, patrilineal pattern with female exogamy, multiple reproductive partnerships (for example, levirate) and direct correlation of biological connectivity with archaeological markers of social status. The generation-long genetic barrier was maintained by systematically choosing partners with similar ancestry from other sites in the Avar realm. Leobersdorf had more biological connections with the Avar heartlands than with Mödling, which is instead linked to another site from the Vienna Basin with European-like ancestry. Mobility between sites was mostly due to female exogamy pointing to different marriage networks as the main driver of the maintenance of the genetic barrier.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39814885 · DOI · PMC11864967

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article The genetics of hybrid incompatibilities [5]
    Maheshwari S, Barbash DA · Annu Rev Genet · 2011 · cited 342 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The origins of reproductive isolation in plants [6]
    Baack E, Melo MC, Rieseberg LH, Ortiz-Barrientos D · New Phytol · 2015 · cited 244 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Divergence hitchhiking and the spread of genomic isolation during ecological speciation-with-gene-flow [7]
    Via S · Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci · 2012 · cited 239 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The importance of intrinsic postzygotic barriers throughout the speciation process [8]
    Coughlan JM, Matute DR · Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci · 2020 · cited 160 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Reinforcement in plants [9]
    Hopkins R · New Phytol · 2013 · cited 141 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The Reproductive Microbiome: An Emerging Driver of Sexual Selection, Sexual Conflict, Mating Systems, and Reproductive Isolation [10]
    Rowe M, Veerus L, Trosvik P, Buckling A, Pizzari T · Trends Ecol Evol · 2020 · cited 114 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Brandvain Y, Kenney AM, Flagel L, Coop G, Sweigart AL. Speciation and introgression between Mimulus nasutus and Mimulus guttatus. . 2014. PMID 24967630 · DOI · PMC4072524
  2. Wolff P, Jiang H, Wang G, Santos-González J, Köhler C. Paternally expressed imprinted genes establish postzygotic hybridization barriers in Arabidopsis thaliana. . 2015. PMID 26344545 · DOI · PMC4589659
  3. Schumer M, Cui R, Rosenthal GG, Andolfatto P. Reproductive isolation of hybrid populations driven by genetic incompatibilities. . 2015. PMID 25768654 · DOI · PMC4359097
  4. Wang K, Tobias B, Pany-Kucera D, Berner M, Eggers S, Gnecchi-Ruscone GA, et al.. Ancient DNA reveals reproductive barrier despite shared Avar-period culture. . 2025. PMID 39814885 · DOI · PMC11864967
  5. Maheshwari S, Barbash DA. The genetics of hybrid incompatibilities. Annu Rev Genet. 2011. PMID 21910629 · DOI
  6. Baack E, Melo MC, Rieseberg LH, Ortiz-Barrientos D. The origins of reproductive isolation in plants. New Phytol. 2015. PMID 25944305 · DOI
  7. Via S. Divergence hitchhiking and the spread of genomic isolation during ecological speciation-with-gene-flow. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012. PMID 22201174 · DOI · PMC3233719
  8. Coughlan JM, Matute DR. The importance of intrinsic postzygotic barriers throughout the speciation process. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2020. PMID 32654642 · DOI · PMC7423280
  9. Hopkins R. Reinforcement in plants. New Phytol. 2013. PMID 23495388 · DOI
  10. Rowe M, Veerus L, Trosvik P, Buckling A, Pizzari T. The Reproductive Microbiome: An Emerging Driver of Sexual Selection, Sexual Conflict, Mating Systems, and Reproductive Isolation. Trends Ecol Evol. 2020. PMID 31952837 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-29.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • Gene FlowGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene ExpressionGenetics and Genomics
  • GenesGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene AmplificationGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene Expression ProfilingGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene TargetingGenetics and Genomics

All 95 articles in Genetics and Genomics →

At a glance

1,520
PubMed records on this heading
36%
published since 2020
108
review articles
0
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-29; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • Gene FlowGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene ExpressionGenetics and Genomics
  • GenesGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene AmplificationGenetics and Genomics
  • Gene Expression ProfilingGenetics and Genomics

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support