MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537321445 · doi:10.1111/evo.12192

SELECTION BIASES THE PREVALENCE AND TYPE OF EPISTASIS ALONG ADAPTIVE TRAJECTORIES

2013· article· en· W1537321445 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy A. Draghi, Joshua B. Plotkin

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAlfred P. Sloan FoundationArmy Research OfficeBurroughs Wellcome FundU.S. Department of the InteriorAdvanced Research Projects AgencyJames S. McDonnell FoundationDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsEpistasisBiologyAdaptation (eye)Evolutionary biologyExperimental evolutionSelection (genetic algorithm)GeneticsNatural selectionLocus (genetics)Local adaptationGenetic architecturePhenotypeGenePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution to an organism's phenotype from one genetic locus may depend upon the status of other loci. Such epistatic interactions among loci are now recognized as fundamental to shaping the process of adaptation in evolving populations. Although little is known about the structure of epistasis in most organisms, recent experiments with bacterial populations have concluded that antagonistic interactions abound and tend to deaccelerate the pace of adaptation over time. Here, we use the NK model of fitness landscapes to examine how natural selection biases the mutations that substitute during evolution based on their epistatic interactions. We find that, even when beneficial mutations are rare, these biases are strong and change substantially throughout the course of adaptation. In particular, epistasis is less prevalent than the neutral expectation early in adaptation and much more prevalent later, with a concomitant shift from predominantly antagonistic interactions early in adaptation to synergistic and sign epistasis later in adaptation. We observe the same patterns when reanalyzing data from a recent microbial evolution experiment. These results show that when the order of substitutions is not known, standard methods of analysis may suggest that epistasis retards adaptation when in fact it accelerates it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207