MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122330469 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2012.0310

Model and test in a fungus of the probability that beneficial mutations survive drift

2012· article· en· W2122330469 on OpenAlexaff
Danna R. Gifford, J. Arjan G. M. de Visser, Lindi M. Wahl

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyFixation (population genetics)Probability modelGenetic driftMutationEvolutionary biologyGeneticsStatisticsGeneMathematicsGenetic variation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the probability of fixation of beneficial mutations is critically important for building predictive models of adaptive evolution. Despite considerable theoretical work, models of fixation probability have stood untested for nearly a century. However, recent advances in experimental and theoretical techniques permit the development of models with testable predictions. We developed a new model for the probability of surviving genetic drift, a major component of fixation probability, for novel beneficial mutations in the fungus Aspergillus nidulans, based on the life-history characteristics of its colony growth on a solid surface. We tested the model by measuring the probability of surviving drift in 11 adapted strains introduced into wild-type populations of different densities. We found that the probability of surviving drift increased with mutant invasion fitness, and decreased with wild-type density, as expected. The model accurately predicted the survival probability for the majority of mutants, yielding one of the first direct tests of the extinction probability of beneficial mutations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology LettersSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207