Global adaptation complicates the interpretation of genome scans for local adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Spatially varying selection promotes variance in allele frequencies, increasing genetic differentiation between the demes of a metapopulation. For that reason, outliers in the genome-wide distribution of summary statistics measuring genetic differentiation, such as FST, are often interpreted as evidence for alleles that contribute to local adaptation. However, theoretical studies have shown that in spatially structured populations the spread of beneficial mutations with spatially uniform fitness effects can also induce transient genetic differentiation. In recent years, numerous empirical studies have suggested that such species-wide, or global, adaptation makes a substantial contribution to molecular evolution. In this perspective, we discuss how commonly such global adaptation may influence the genome-wide distribution of FST and generate genetic differentiation patterns, which could be mistaken for local adaptation. To illustrate this, we use forward-in-time population genetic simulations assuming parameters for the rate and strength of beneficial mutations consistent with estimates from natural populations. We demonstrate that the spread of globally beneficial mutations in parapatric populations may frequently generate FST outliers, which could be misinterpreted as evidence for local adaptation. The spread of beneficial mutations causes selective sweeps at flanking sites, so in some cases, the effects of global versus local adaptation may be distinguished by examining patterns of nucleotide diversity within and between populations in addition to FST. However, when local adaptation has been only recently established, it may be much more difficult to distinguish from global adaptation, due to less accumulation of linkage disequilibrium at flanking sites. Through our discussion, we conclude that a large fraction of FST outliers that are presumed to arise from local adaptation may instead be due to global adaptation.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Simulation or modeling | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Simulation or modeling | low |
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 | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".