Genetic and selective constraints on the optimization of gene product diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract RNA and protein expressed from the same gene can have diverse isoforms due to various post-transcriptional and post-translational modifications. For the vast majority of alternative isoforms, It is unknown whether they are adaptive or simply biological noise. As we cannot experimentally probe the function of each isoform, we can ask whether the distribution of isoforms across genes and across species is consistent with expectations from different evolutionary processes. However, there is currently no theoretical framework that can generate such predictions. To address this, we developed a mathematical model where isoform abundances are determined collectively by cis -acting loci, trans -acting factors, gene expression levels, and isoform decay rates to predict isoform abundance distributions across species and genes in the face of mutation, genetic drift, and selection. We found that factors beyond selection, such as effective population size and the number of cis -acting loci, significantly influence evolutionary outcomes. Notably, suboptimal phenotypes are more likely to evolve when the population is small and/or when the number of cis -loci is large. We also explored scenarios where modification processes have both beneficial and detrimental effects, revealing a non-monotonic relationship between effective population size and optimization, demonstrating how opposing selection pressures on cis - and trans -acting loci can constrain the optimization of gene product diversity. As a demonstration of the power of our theory, we compared the expected distribution of A-to-I RNA editing levels in coleoids and found this to be largely consistent with non-adaptive explanations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".