ArticleGenetics2017
Selection Limits to Adaptive Walks on Correlated Landscapes.
Article in Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- FREQ-Seq2: a method for precise high-throughput combinatorial quantification of allele frequencies.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Surfing on the seascape: Adaptation in a changing environment.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2019Article
- Article
- Adaptation, fitness landscape learning and fast evolution.F1000Research · 2019Article
- How to Escape Local Optima in Black Box Optimisation: When Non-elitism Outperforms Elitism.Algorithmica · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptation depends critically on the effects of new mutations and their dependency on the genetic background in which they occur. These two factors can be summarized by the fitness landscape. However, it would require testing all mutations in all backgrounds, making the definition and analysis of fitness landscapes mostly inaccessible. Instead of postulating a particular fitness landscape, we address this problem by considering general classes of landscapes and calculating an upper limit for the time it takes for a population to reach a fitness peak, circumventing the need to have full knowledge about the fitness landscape. We analyze populations in the weak-mutation regime and characterize the conditions that enable them to quickly reach the fitness peak as a function of the number of sites under selection. We show that for additive landscapes there is a critical selection strength enabling populations to reach high-fitness genotypes, regardless of the distribution of effects. This threshold scales with the number of sites under selection, effectively setting a limit to adaptation, and results from the inevitable increase in deleterious mutational pressure as the population adapts in a space of discrete genotypes. Furthermore, we show that for the class of all unimodal landscapes this condition is sufficient but not necessary for rapid adaptation, as in some highly epistatic landscapes the critical strength does not depend on the number of sites under selection; effectively removing this barrier to adaptation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.