Consequences of single-locus and tightly linked genomic architectures for evolutionary responses to environmental change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Genetic and genomic architectures of traits under selection are key factors influencing evolutionary responses. Yet, knowledge of their impacts has been limited by a widespread assumption that most traits are controlled by unlinked polygenic architectures. Recent advances in genome sequencing and eco-evolutionary modelling are unlocking the potential for integrating genomic information into predictions of population responses to environmental change. Using eco-evolutionary simulations, we demonstrate that hypothetical single-locus control of a life history trait produces highly variable and unpredictable harvesting-induced evolution relative to the classically applied multi-locus model. Single-locus control of complex traits is thought to be uncommon, yet blocks of linked genes, such as those associated with some types of structural genomic variation, have emerged as taxonomically widespread phenomena. Inheritance of linked architectures resembles that of single loci, thus enabling single-locus-like modeling of polygenic adaptation. Yet, the number of loci, their effect sizes, and the degree of linkage among them all occur along a continuum. We review how linked architectures are often associated, directly or indirectly, with traits expected to be under selection from anthropogenic stressors and are likely to play a large role in adaptation to environmental disturbance. We suggest using single-locus models to explore evolutionary extremes and uncertainties when the trait architecture is unknown, refining parameters as genomic information becomes available, and explicitly incorporating linkage among loci when possible. By overestimating the complexity (e.g., number of independent loci) of the genomic architecture of traits under selection, we risk underestimating the complexity (e.g., nonlinearity) of their evolutionary dynamics.
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".