Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population genetic models predict that alleles with small selection coefficients may be swamped by migration and will not contribute to local adaptation. But if most alleles contributing to standing variation are of small effect, how does local adaptation proceed? Here I review predictions of population and quantitative genetic models and use individual-based simulations to illustrate how the architecture of local adaptation depends on the genetic redundancy of the trait, the maintenance of standing genetic variation (V(G)), and the susceptibility of alleles to swamping. Even when population genetic models predict swamping for individual alleles, considerable local adaptation can evolve at the phenotypic level if there is sufficient V(G). However, in such cases the underlying architecture of divergence is transient: F(ST) is low across all loci, and no locus makes an important contribution for very long. Because this kind of local adaptation is mainly due to transient frequency changes and allelic covariances, these architectures will be difficult--if not impossible--to detect using current approaches to studying the genomic basis of adaptation. Even when alleles are large and resistant to swamping, architectures can be highly transient if genetic redundancy and mutation rates are high. These results suggest that drift can play a critical role in shaping the architecture of local adaptation, both through eroding V(G) and affecting the rate of turnover of polymorphisms with redundant phenotypic effects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".