The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
RISK OF POPULATION EXTINCTION FROM FIXATION OF NEW DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS
Open accessAbstract
The fixation of new deleterious mutations is analyzed for a randomly mating population of constant size with no environmental or demographic stochasticity. Mildly deleterious mutations are far more important in causing loss of fitness and eventual extinction than are lethal and semilethal mutations in populations with effective sizes, Ne, larger than a few individuals. If all mildly deleterious mutations have the same selection coefficient, s against heterozygotes and 2s against homozygotes, the mean time to extinction, t¯, is asymptotically proportional to e4Nes/Ne for 4Nes > 1. Nearly neutral mutations pose the greatest risk of extinction for stable populations, because the magnitude of selection coefficient that minimizes t¯ is about ŝ = 0.4/Ne. The influence of variance in selection coefficients among mutations is analyzed assuming a gamma distribution of s, with mean s¯ and variance σs2. The mean time to extinction increases with variance in selection coefficients if s¯ is near ŝ, but can decrease greatly if s¯ is much larger than ŝ. For a given coefficient of variation of s, c=σs/s¯, the mean time to extinction is asymptotically proportional to Ne1+1/c2 for 4Nes¯>1. When s is exponentially distributed, (c = 1) t¯ is asymptotically proportional to Ne2. These results in conjunction with data on the rate and magnitude of mildly deleterious mutations in Drosophila melanogaster indicate that even moderately large populations, with effective sizes on the order of Ne = 103, may incur a substantial risk of extinction from the fixation of new mutations.
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
Handbook of Mathematical Functions
McQuarrie, D. A. (1966) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1972842 · Cited by 40,433
The Theory of Stochastic Processes
Cox, D. R., Miller, H. D., Weiss, G., & Shuler, K. (1966) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3047872 · Cited by 3,324
Model of effectively neutral mutations in which selective constraint is incorporated
Kimura, M. (1979) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.76.7.3440 · Cited by 254
Cited by
Lande, R. (1995) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09040782.x · Cited by 686
Self-citationInbreeding and Extinction: A Threshold Effect
Frankham, R. (1995) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09040792.x · Cited by 601
The distribution of fitness effects of new deleterious amino acid mutations in humans.
Eyre-Walker, A., Woolfit, M., & Phelps, T. (2006) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.106.057570 · Cited by 377
A Quantitative-Genetic Perspective on Conservation Issues
Lynch, M. (1996) · Conservation Genetics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2504-9_15 · Cited by 403
High genomic deleterious mutation rates in hominids
Eyre-Walker, A., & Keightley, P. D. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/16915 · Cited by 398
Metadata
- Authors
- Lande, R.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1994-10
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1460-1469
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W2071856489
- Cited by
- 514
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: RISK OF POPULATION EXTINCTION FROM FIXATION OF NEW DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1994.tb02188.x
- The paper
- Lande, R. (1994). RISK OF POPULATION EXTINCTION FROM FIXATION OF NEW DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1994.tb02188.x
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.