Multilocus approaches for the measurement of selection on correlated genetic loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of ecological speciation is inherently linked to the study of selection. Methods for estimating phenotypic selection within a generation based on associations between trait values and fitness (e.g. survival) of individuals are established. These methods attempt to disentangle selection acting directly on a trait from indirect selection caused by correlations with other traits via multivariate statistical approaches (i.e. inference of selection gradients). The estimation of selection on genotypic or genomic variation could also benefit from disentangling direct and indirect selection on genetic loci. However, achieving this goal is difficult with genomic data because the number of potentially correlated genetic loci (p) is very large relative to the number of individuals sampled (n). In other words, the number of model parameters exceeds the number of observations (p ≫ n). We present simulations examining the utility of whole-genome regression approaches (i.e. Bayesian sparse linear mixed models) for quantifying direct selection in cases where p ≫ n. Such models have been used for genome-wide association mapping and are common in artificial breeding. Our results show they hold promise for studies of natural selection in the wild and thus of ecological speciation. But we also demonstrate important limitations to the approach and discuss study designs required for more robust inferences.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".