Evaluating the Impact of Population Bottlenecks in Experimental Evolution
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
Experimental evolution involves severe, periodic reductions in population size when fresh media are inoculated during serial transfer. These bottlenecks affect the dynamics of evolution, reducing the probability that a beneficial mutation will reach fixation. We quantify the impact of these bottlenecks on the evolutionary dynamics, for populations that grow exponentially between transfers and for populations in which growth is curbed by a resource-limited environment. We find that in both cases, mutations that survive bottlenecks are equally likely to occur, per unit time, at all times during the growth phase. We estimate the total fraction of beneficial mutations that are lost due to bottlenecks during experimental evolution protocols and derive the "optimal" dilution ratio, the ratio that maximizes the number of surviving beneficial mutations. Although more severe dilution ratios are often used in the literature, we find that a ratio of 0.1-0.2 minimizes the chances that rare beneficial mutations are lost. Finally, we provide a number of useful approximate results and illustrate our approach with applications to experimental evolution protocols in the literature.
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