Evolutionary genetics of immunological supertypes reveals two faces of the Red Queen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Red Queen host-parasite co-evolution can drive adaptations of immune genes by positive selection that erodes genetic variation (Red Queen arms race) or results in a balanced polymorphism (Red Queen dynamics) and long-term preservation of genetic variation (trans-species polymorphism). These two Red Queen processes are opposite extremes of the co-evolutionary spectrum. Here we show that both Red Queen processes can operate simultaneously by analysing the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) in guppies (Poecilia reticulata and P. obscura) and swamp guppies (Micropoecilia picta). Sub-functionalisation of MHC alleles into 'supertypes' explains how polymorphisms persist during rapid host-parasite co-evolution. Simulations show the maintenance of supertypes as balanced polymorphisms, consistent with Red Queen dynamics, whereas alleles within supertypes are subject to positive selection in a Red Queen arms race. Building on the divergent allele advantage hypothesis, we show that functional aspects of allelic diversity help to elucidate the evolution of polymorphic genes involved in Red Queen co-evolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".