MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555283157 · doi:10.1534/genetics.116.192856

Fixation Probability in a Haploid-Diploid Population

2016· article· en· W2555283157 on OpenAlexaff
Kazuhiro Bessho, Sarah P. Otto

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPloidyBiologyFixation (population genetics)GeneticsPopulationEvolutionary biologyGeneDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical population genetic theory generally assumes either a fully haploid or fully diploid life cycle. However, many organisms exhibit more complex life cycles, with both free-living haploid and diploid stages. Here we ask what the probability of fixation is for selected alleles in organisms with haploid-diploid life cycles. We develop a genetic model that considers the population dynamics using both the Moran model and Wright-Fisher model. Applying a branching process approximation, we obtain an accurate fixation probability assuming that the population is large and the net effect of the mutation is beneficial. We also find the diffusion approximation for the fixation probability, which is accurate even in small populations and for deleterious alleles, as long as selection is weak. These fixation probabilities from branching process and diffusion approximations are similar when selection is weak for beneficial mutations that are not fully recessive. In many cases, particularly when one phase predominates, the fixation probability differs substantially for haploid-diploid organisms compared to either fully haploid or diploid species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207