Stabilizing selection, mutational bias, and the evolution of sex*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stabilizing selection around a fixed phenotypic optimum is expected to disfavor sexual reproduction, since asexually reproducing organisms can maintain a higher fitness at equilibrium, while sex disrupts combinations of compensatory mutations. This conclusion rests on the assumption that mutational effects on phenotypic traits are unbiased, that is, mutation does not tend to push phenotypes in any particular direction. In this article, we consider a model of stabilizing selection acting on an arbitrary number of polygenic traits coded by bialellic loci, and show that mutational bias may greatly reduce the mean fitness of asexual populations compared with sexual ones in regimes where mutations have weak to moderate fitness effects. Indeed, mutation and drift tend to push the population mean phenotype away from the optimum, this effect being enhanced by the low effective population size of asexual populations. In a second part, we present results from individual-based simulations showing that positive rates of sex are favored when mutational bias is present, while the population evolves toward complete asexuality in the absence of bias. We also present analytical (QLE) approximations for the selective forces acting on sex in terms of the effect of sex on the mean and variance in fitness among offspring.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".