Genetic variance in contrasting environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolutionary response of a trait to directional selection depends upon the level of additive genetic variance. It has been long argued that sustained selection will tend to deplete additive genetic variance as favoured alleles approach fixation. Non-additive genetic variance, due to interactions among alleles within and between loci, does not immediately contribute to an evolutionary response, although shifts in the allele frequencies within and between interacting loci may convert interaction variance into additive variance. Here we consider the possibility that an environmental shift may alter allelic interactions in ways that convert nonadditive into additive genetic variance. Specifically, we performed experiments that used a Bayesian implementation of the animal model to estimate the additive, dominance, and maternal components of variance for a pedigreed population of Brassica rapa. One experiment was performed in a field that mimicked agricultural conditions from which the base population was drawn, while the other was performed in the benign conditions of a greenhouse. Although the additive genetic variance was elevated in the greenhouse condition, no consistent pattens emerged that would indicate a conversion of dominance variance. The unusually low genetic variance and broad confidence intervals for the variance estimates obtained through this analysis preclude definitive interpretations. Thus, we promote further investigation to determine if between-environment changes in additive genetic variance can be traced to conversion of nonadditive variance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.016 |
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".