MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553352972 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msw237

Shifting Balance on a Static Mutation–Selection Landscape: A Novel Scenario of Positive Selection

2016· article· en· W2553352972 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher T. Jones, Noor Youssef, Edward Susko, Joseph P. Bielawski

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFitness landscapeSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyMutationBalance (ability)Evolutionary biologyInterpretation (philosophy)Sequence (biology)Natural selectionStabilizing selectionGeneticsComputer sciencePopulationArtificial intelligenceDemographyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A version of the mechanistic mutation-selection (MutSel) model that accounts for temporal dynamics at a site is presented. This is used to show that the rate ratio dN/dS at a site can be transiently >1 even when fitness coefficients are fixed or the fitness landscape is static. This occurs whenever a site drifts away from its fitness peak and is then forced back by selection, a process reminiscent of shifting balance. Shifting balance is strongest when the substitution process is not dominated by selection or drift, but admits interplay between the two. Under this condition, site-specific changes in dN/dS were inferred in 78-100% of trials, and positive selection (i.e., dN/dS>1) in 10-40% of trials, when sequence alignments generated under MutSel were fitted to two popular phenomenological branch-site models. These results demonstrate that positive selection can occur without a change in fitness regime, and that this is detectable by branch-site models. In addition, MutSel is used to show that a site can be occupied by a sub-optimal amino acid for long periods on a fixed landscape when selection is stringent. This has implications for the interpretation of constant-but-different site patterns typically attributed to changes in fitness. Furthermore, a version of MutSel with episodic changes in fitness coefficients is used to illustrate systematic differences between parameters used to generate data under MutSel and their counterparts estimated by a simple codon model. Motivated by a discrepancy in the literature, interpretation of dN/dS in the context of MutSel is also discussed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations41
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207