Evolution of the additive genetic variance–covariance matrix under continuous directional selection on a complex behavioural phenotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the pace at which human-induced environmental changes occur, a pressing challenge is to determine the speed with which selection can drive evolutionary change. A key determinant of adaptive response to multivariate phenotypic selection is the additive genetic variance-covariance matrix ( G: ). Yet knowledge of G: in a population experiencing new or altered selection is not sufficient to predict selection response because G: itself evolves in ways that are poorly understood. We experimentally evaluated changes in G: when closely related behavioural traits experience continuous directional selection. We applied the genetic covariance tensor approach to a large dataset (n = 17 328 individuals) from a replicated, 31-generation artificial selection experiment that bred mice for voluntary wheel running on days 5 and 6 of a 6-day test. Selection on this subset of G: induced proportional changes across the matrix for all 6 days of running behaviour within the first four generations. The changes in G: induced by selection resulted in a fourfold slower-than-predicted rate of response to selection. Thus, selection exacerbated constraints within G: and limited future adaptive response, a phenomenon that could have profound consequences for populations facing rapid environmental change.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".