The effect of epistasis on sexually antagonistic genetic variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing evidence of segregating sexually antagonistic (SA) genetic variation for fitness in laboratory and wild populations, yet the conditions for the maintenance of such variation can be restrictive. Epistatic interactions between genes can contribute to the maintenance of genetic variance in fitness and we suggest that epistasis between SA genes should be pervasive. Here, we explore its effect on SA genetic variation in fitness using a two locus model with negative epistasis. Our results demonstrate that epistasis often increases the parameter space showing polymorphism for SA loci. This is because selection in one locus is affected by allele frequencies at the other, which can act to balance net selection in males and females. Increased linkage between SA loci had more marginal effects. We also show that under some conditions, large portions of the parameter space evolve to a state where male benefit alleles are fixed at one locus and female benefit alleles at the other. This novel effect of epistasis on SA loci, which we term the 'equity effect', may have important effects on population differentiation and may contribute to speciation. More generally, these results support the suggestion that epistasis contributes to population divergence.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".