MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209279126 · doi:10.1086/717813

Hazardous Loss of Genetic Diversity through Selective Sweeps in Asexual Populations

2021· article· en· W3209279126 on OpenAlexaff
Lindi M. Wahl, Mark M. Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsexual reproductionBiologyPopulationEvolutionary biologyAdaptation (eye)Sexual reproductionMutation rateExtinction (optical mineralogy)Evolution of sexual reproductionPhylogenetic treeSmall population sizeGenetic diversityGenetic driftPopulation sizeEcologyGenetic variationGeneticsGeneDemographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractWith the twofold cost of sex, derived asexual organisms have an immediate reproductive advantage over their sexual sisters. Yet the "twiggy" phylogenetic distribution of asexual lineages implies that they become extinct relatively quickly over evolutionary time. Meanwhile, bacteria and archaea have persisted for billions of years without requiring sexual reproduction. A simple explanation for this difference is that prokaryotes have very large population sizes that are not subject to the accumulation of deleterious mutations, but this implies that drift and mutational meltdown dominate derived asexual populations. Here, we explore a different hazard, quantifying the degree to which genetic variation is lost in asexual populations experiencing selective sweeps. Even though large populations generate diversity by mutation during sweeps, we find that populations that are safe from mutational meltdown may still be reduced to dangerous effective population sizes by sweeps. Thus, ironically, adaptation itself reduces further adaptive potential and may predispose asexual populations to extinction. We derive a simple approximation for the effective population size after a hard sweep and explore the impact of recent sweeps on evolutionary rescue. These factors may help to explain the phylogenetic twigginess of asexuals, the maintenance of sex and recombination, and the evolutionary persistence of prokaryotes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207