PLOIDALLY ANTAGONISTIC SELECTION MAINTAINS STABLE GENETIC POLYMORPHISM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the maintenance of genetic variation in the face of selection remains a key issue in evolutionary biology. One potential mechanism for the maintenance of genetic variation is opposing selection during the diploid and haploid stages of biphasic life cycles universal among eukaryotic sexual organisms. If haploid and diploid gene expression both occur, selection can act in each phase, potentially in opposing directions. In addition, sex-specific selection during haploid phases is likely simply because male and female gametophytes/gametes tend to have contrasting life histories. We explored the potential for the maintenance of a stable polymorphism under ploidally antagonistic as well as sex-specific selection. Furthermore, we examined the role of the chromosomal location of alleles (autosomal or sex-linked). Our analyses show that the most permissible conditions for the maintenance of polymorphism occur under negative ploidy-by-sex interactions, where stronger selection for an allele in female than male diploids is coupled with weaker selection against the allele in female than male haploids. Such ploidy-by-sex interactions also promote allele frequency differences between the sexes. With constant fitness, ploidally antagonistic selection can maintain stable polymorphisms for autosomal and X-linked genes but not for Y-linked genes. We discuss the implications of our results and outline a number of biological settings where the scenarios modeled may apply.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".