Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25232825›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2014

Multidimensional epistasis and the transitory advantage of sex.

Stefan Nowak, Johannes Neidhart, Ivan G Szendro, Joachim Krug

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Sex in a test tube: testing the benefits of in vitro recombination.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stefan NowakInstitut für Theoretische Physik, Universität zu Köln, Cologne, Germany.
Johannes NeidhartInstitut für Theoretische Physik, Universität zu Köln, Cologne, Germany.
Ivan G SzendroInstitut für Theoretische Physik, Universität zu Köln, Cologne, Germany.
Joachim KrugInstitut für Theoretische Physik, Universität zu Köln, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying and quantifying the benefits of sex and recombination is a long-standing problem in evolutionary theory. In particular, contradictory claims have been made about the existence of a benefit of recombination on high dimensional fitness landscapes in the presence of sign epistasis. Here we present a comparative numerical study of sexual and asexual evolutionary dynamics of haploids on tunably rugged model landscapes under strong selection, paying special attention to the temporal development of the evolutionary advantage of recombination and the link between population diversity and the rate of adaptation. We show that the adaptive advantage of recombination on static rugged landscapes is strictly transitory. At early times, an advantage of recombination arises through the possibility to combine individually occurring beneficial mutations, but this effect is reversed at longer times by the much more efficient trapping of recombining populations at local fitness peaks. These findings are explained by means of well-established results for a setup with only two loci. In accordance with the Red Queen hypothesis the transitory advantage can be prolonged indefinitely in fluctuating environments, and it is maximal when the environment fluctuates on the same time scale on which trapping at local optima typically occurs.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticComputational BiologyEpistasis, GeneticEvolution, MolecularRecombination, GeneticReproductive Physiological PhenomenaSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID25232825
PMCPMC4168978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.