RECOMBINATION AND HITCHHIKING OF DELETERIOUS ALLELES
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When new advantageous alleles arise and spread within a population, deleterious alleles at neighboring loci can hitchhike alongside them and spread to fixation in areas of low recombination, introducing a fixed mutation load. We use branching processes and diffusion equations to calculate the probability that a deleterious allele hitchhikes and fixes alongside an advantageous mutant. As expected, the probability of fixation of a deleterious hitchhiker rises with the selective advantage of the sweeping allele and declines with the selective disadvantage of the deleterious hitchhiker. We then use computer simulations of a genome with an infinite number of loci to investigate the increase in load after an advantageous mutant is introduced. We show that the appearance of advantageous alleles on genetic backgrounds loaded with deleterious alleles has two potential effects: it can fix deleterious alleles, and it can facilitate the persistence of recombinant lineages that happen to occur. The latter is expected to reduce the signals of selection in the surrounding region. We consider these results in light of human genetic data to infer how likely it is that such deleterious hitchhikers have occurred in our recent evolutionary past.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it