Beyond the single gene: How epistasis and gene-by-environment effects influence crop domestication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domestication is a multifaceted evolutionary process, involving changes in individual genes, genetic interactions, and emergent phenotypes. There has been extensive discussion of the phenotypic characteristics of plant domestication, and recent research has started to identify the specific genes and mutational mechanisms that control domestication traits. However, there is an apparent disconnect between the simple genetic architecture described for many crop domestication traits, which should facilitate rapid phenotypic change under selection, and the slow rate of change reported from the archeobotanical record. A possible explanation involves the middle ground between individual genetic changes and their expression during development, where gene-by-gene (epistatic) and gene-by-environment interactions can modify the expression of phenotypes and opportunities for selection. These aspects of genetic architecture have the potential to significantly slow the speed of phenotypic evolution during crop domestication and improvement. Here we examine whether epistatic and gene-by-environment interactions have shaped how domestication traits have evolved. We review available evidence from the literature, and we analyze two domestication-related traits, shattering and flowering time, in a mapping population derived from a cross between domesticated foxtail millet and its wild progenitor. We find that compared with wild progenitor alleles, those favored during domestication often have large phenotypic effects and are relatively insensitive to genetic background and environmental effects. Consistent selection should thus be able to rapidly change traits during domestication. We conclude that if phenotypic evolution was slow during crop domestication, this is more likely due to cultural or historical factors than epistatic or environmental constraints.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".