MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167584142 · doi:10.1093/jhered/esq019

Finite Populations, Finite Resources, and the Evolutionary Maintenance of Genetic Recombination

2010· article· en· W2167584142 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon H. Ackerman, Amir R. Kermany, Dónal A. Hickey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heredity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistasisBiologyRecombinationFixation (population genetics)Selection (genetic algorithm)Lineage (genetic)Evolutionary biologyGeneticsPopulationCompetition (biology)MutationPositive selectionGenetic recombinationMutation rateGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most previous models for the evolution of sex implicitly assume infinite population sizes and limitless resources. However, because favorable mutations are very rare and eukaryotic populations are finite, it has already been shown that multiple favorable mutants virtually never occur by chance. Therefore, sex is required to combine different favorable mutations into a single lineage. Second, we show that even when multiple favorable mutations do coexist, competition between genotypes can create negative epistasis for fitness, thus favoring recombination. Competition is especially effective when selection is at the level of viability in K-selected species living in a resource-limited environment. This means that recombination is advantageous both for incorporating new favorable mutations into the gene pool and for accelerating their increase to fixation. These advantages of recombination are diminished, however, as genome sizes decrease or as the amount of competition within the species is a less important component of selection.

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)0.001
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 score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HereditySame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207