MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414402685 · doi:10.1016/j.tpb.2025.09.003

Dynamics of the distribution of fitness effects during adaptation

2025· article· en· W4414402685 on OpenAlexafffund
Tenoch Morales, Abigail Kushnir, Lindi M. Wahl

Bibliographic record

VenueTheoretical Population Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)AlleleFitness landscapeMutationDistribution (mathematics)Genetic FitnessEvolutionary dynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical measures of the distribution of fitness effects of new mutations (the DFE) have been increasingly successful, and have recently highlighted the fact that the DFE changes during adaptation. Here, we analyze these dynamic changes to the DFE during a simplified adaptive process: an adaptive walk across an additive fitness landscape. First, we derive analytical approximations for the underlying fitness distributions of alleles present in the genotype and available through mutation and use these to derive expressions for the DFE at each step of the adaptive walk. We then confirm these predictions with independent simulations that relax several simplifying assumptions made in the analysis. As expected, our analysis predicts that as adaptation proceeds, the DFE is reshaped dynamically throughout the walk by a decrease in the beneficial fraction of mutations (a shift to the left). Surprisingly, different mechanisms drive this change depending on the number of alleles available per site: for a small number of available alleles, we observe a depletion of high-fitness alleles available through mutation as expected, however for a large number of alleles we observe that adaptation may be more limited by the availability of low-fitness alleles to be replaced, rather than by the availability of high-fitness alleles to replace them.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheoretical Population BiologySame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207