ArticleJournal of evolutionary biology2021
Evolution of resistance under alternative models of selective interference.
Article in Journal of evolutionary biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of linkage disequilibrium on the evolution of resistance to multiple pesticides.Journal of economic entomology · 2026Article
- Optimization of long-lasting insecticidal bed nets for resistance management: a modelling study and user-friendly app.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Beyond redundant kill: A fundamental explanation of how insecticide mixtures work for resistance management.Pest management science · 2023Review
- Evolution of resistance under alternative models of selective interference.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of multiple pesticides or drugs can lead to a simultaneous selection pressure for resistance alleles at different loci. Models of resistance evolution focus on how this can delay the spread of resistance through a population, but often neglect how this can also reduce the probability that a resistance allele spreads. This neglected factor has been studied in a parallel literature as selective interference. Models of interference use alternative constructions of fitness, where selection coefficients from different loci either add or multiply. Although these are equivalent under weak selection, the two constructions make alternative predictions under the strong selection that characterizes resistance evolution. Here, simulations are used to examine the effects of interference on the probability of fixation and time to fixation of a new and strongly beneficial mutation in the presence of another strongly beneficial allele with variable starting frequency. The results from simulations show a complicated pattern of effects. The key result is that, under multiplicativity, the presence of the strongly beneficial allele leads to a small reduction in the probability of fixation for the new beneficial mutation up to ~10%, and a negligible increase in the average time to fixation up to ~2%, whereas under additivity, the effect is more substantial at up to ~50% for the probability of fixation and ~100% for the average time to fixation. Consequently, the effect of interference is only an important feature of resistance evolution under additivity. Current evidence from studies of experimental evolution provides widespread support for the basic features of additivity, which suggests that interference may afford resistance a different pattern of evolution than other adaptations: rather than the gradual and simultaneous selection of many alleles with small effects, the rapid evolution of resistance may involve the sequential selection of alleles with large effects.
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.