ArticleGenetics2022
A scaling law of multilevel evolution: how the balance between within- and among-collective evolution is determined.
Article in Genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The key role of cheaters in the persistence of cooperation.BMC biology · 2026Article
- Generalizing the central dogma as a cross-hierarchical principle of biology.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Scaling laws of bacterial and archaeal plasmids.Nature communications · 2025Article
- The key role of cheaters in the persistence of cooperation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Formation of human kinship structures depending on population size and cultural mutation rate.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Multilevel selection in the evolution of sexual dimorphism in phenotypic plasticity.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous living systems are hierarchically organized, whereby replicating components are grouped into reproducing collectives-e.g., organelles are grouped into cells, and cells are grouped into multicellular organisms. In such systems, evolution can operate at two levels: evolution among collectives, which tends to promote selfless cooperation among components within collectives (called altruism), and evolution within collectives, which tends to promote cheating among components within collectives. The balance between within- and among-collective evolution thus exerts profound impacts on the fitness of these systems. Here, we investigate how this balance depends on the size of a collective (denoted by N) and the mutation rate of components (m) through mathematical analyses and computer simulations of multiple population genetics models. We first confirm a previous result that increasing N or m accelerates within-collective evolution relative to among-collective evolution, thus promoting the evolution of cheating. Moreover, we show that when within- and among-collective evolution exactly balance each other out, the following scaling relation generally holds: Nmα is a constant, where scaling exponent α depends on multiple parameters, such as the strength of selection and whether altruism is a binary or quantitative trait. This relation indicates that although N and m have quantitatively distinct impacts on the balance between within- and among-collective evolution, their impacts become identical if m is scaled with a proper exponent. Our results thus provide a novel insight into conditions under which cheating or altruism evolves in hierarchically organized replicating systems.
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.