Detecting Adaptation in Protein-Coding Genes Using a Bayesian Site-Heterogeneous Mutation-Selection Codon Substitution Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Codon substitution models have traditionally attempted to uncover signatures of adaptation within protein-coding genes by contrasting the rates of synonymous and non-synonymous substitutions. Another modeling approach, known as the mutation-selection framework, attempts to explicitly account for selective patterns at the amino acid level, with some approaches allowing for heterogeneity in these patterns across codon sites. Under such a model, substitutions at a given position occur at the neutral or nearly neutral rate when they are synonymous, or when they correspond to replacements between amino acids of similar fitness; substitutions from high to low (low to high) fitness amino acids have comparatively low (high) rates. Here, we study the use of such a mutation-selection framework as a null model for the detection of adaptation. Following previous works in this direction, we include a deviation parameter that has the effect of capturing the surplus, or deficit, in non-synonymous rates, relative to what would be expected under a mutation-selection modeling framework that includes a Dirichlet process approach to account for across-codon-site variation in amino acid fitness profiles. We use simulations, along with a few real data sets, to study the behavior of the approach, and find it to have good power with a low false-positive rate. Altogether, we emphasize the potential of recent mutation-selection models in the detection of adaptation, calling for further model refinements as well as large-scale applications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".