Consequences of Stability-Induced Epistasis for Substitution Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Do interactions between residues in a protein (i.e., epistasis) significantly alter evolutionary dynamics? If so, what consequences might they have on inference from traditional codon substitution models which assume site-independence for the sake of computational tractability? To investigate the effects of epistasis on substitution rates, we employed a mechanistic mutation-selection model in conjunction with a fitness framework derived from protein stability. We refer to this as the stability-informed site-dependent (S-SD) model and developed a new stability-informed site-independent (S-SI) model that captures the average effect of stability constraints on individual sites of a protein. Comparison of S-SI and S-SD offers a novel and direct method for investigating the consequences of stability-induced epistasis on protein evolution. We developed S-SI and S-SD models for three natural proteins and showed that they generate sequences consistent with real alignments. Our analyses revealed that epistasis tends to increase substitution rates compared with the rates under site-independent evolution. We then assessed the epistatic sensitivity of individual site and discovered a counterintuitive effect: Highly connected sites were less influenced by epistasis relative to exposed sites. Lastly, we show that, despite the unrealistic assumptions, traditional models perform comparably well in the presence and absence of epistasis and provide reasonable summaries of average selection intensities. We conclude that epistatic models are critical to understanding protein evolutionary dynamics, but epistasis might not be required for reasonable inference of selection pressure when averaging over time and sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".