The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fixation Probability and Time in Subdivided Populations
Abstract
New alleles arising in a population by mutation ultimately are either fixed or lost. Either is possible, for both beneficial and deleterious alleles, because of stochastic changes in allele frequency due to genetic drift. Spatially structured populations differ from unstructured populations in the probability of fixation and the time that this fixation takes. Previous results have generally made many assumptions: that all demes contribute to the next generation in exact proportion to their current sizes, that new mutations are beneficial, and that new alleles have additive effects. In this article these assumptions are relaxed, allowing for an arbitrary distribution among demes of reproductive success, both beneficial and deleterious effects, and arbitrary dominance. The effects of population structure can be expressed with two summary statistics: the effective population size and a variant of Wright's FST. In general, the probability of fixation is strongly affected by population structure, as is the expected time to fixation or loss. Population structure changes the effective size of the species, often strongly downward; smaller effective size increases the probability of fixing deleterious alleles and decreases the probability of fixing beneficial alleles. On the other hand, population structure causes an increase in the homozygosity of alleles, which increases the probability of fixing beneficial alleles but somewhat decreases the probability of fixing deleterious alleles. The probability of fixing new beneficial alleles can be simply described by 2hs(1 – FST)Ne/Ntot, where hs is the change in fitness of heterozygotes relative to the ancestral homozygote, FST is a weighted version of Wright's measure of population subdivision, and Ne and Ntot are the effective and census sizes, respectively. These results are verified by simulation for a broad range of population structures, including the island model, the stepping-stone model, and a model with extinction and recolonization.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The genetical theory of natural selection
Fisher, R. A. (1930) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.27468 · Cited by 17,617
A Mathematical Theory of Natural and Artificial Selection, Part V: Selection and Mutation
Haldane, J. B. S. (1927) · Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1017/s0305004100015644 · Cited by 1,326
Cited by
Rieseberg, L. H., & Willis, J. H. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1137729 · Cited by 1,040
Morjan, C. L., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2004) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2004.02164.x · Cited by 479
Knoll, A. H., & Nowak, M. A. (2017) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1603076 · Cited by 277
The polymorphic prelude to Bateson–Dobzhansky–Muller incompatibilities
Cutter, A. D. (2012) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.004 · Cited by 220
Native microbiome dominates over host factors in shaping the probiotic genetic evolution in the gut
Jiang, S., Zhang, C., Han, Z., Ma, W., Wang, S., Huo, D., Cui, W., Zhai, Q., Huang, S., & Zhang, J. (2023) · npj Biofilms and Microbiomes · doi:10.1038/s41522-023-00447-8 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Whitlock, M. C.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-06-01
- Volume
- 164
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 767-779
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W1961980423
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.