4.7 Article

Selection strategies for randomly partitioned genetic replicators

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
卷 99, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.99.062416

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) [647275]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [647275] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The amplification cycle of many replicators (natural or artificial) involves the usage of a host compartment, inside of which the replicator expresses phenotypic compounds necessary to carry out its genetic replication. For example, viruses infect cells, where they express their own proteins and replicate. In this process, the host cell boundary limits the diffusion of the viral protein products, thereby ensuring that phenotypic compounds, such as proteins, promote the replication of the genes that encoded them. This role of maintaining spatial colocalization, also called genotype-phenotype linkage, is a critical function of compartments in natural selection. In most cases, however, individual replicating elements do not distribute systematically among the hosts, but are randomly partitioned. Depending on the replicator-to-host ratio, more than one variant may thus occupy some compartments, blurring the genotype-phenotype linkage and affecting the effectiveness of natural selection. We derive selection equations for a variety of such random multiple occupancy situations, in particular considering the effect of replicator population polymorphism and internal replication dynamics. We conclude that the deleterious effect of random multiple occupancy on selection is relatively benign, and may even completely vanish is some specific cases. In addition, given that higher mean occupancy allows larger populations to be channeled through the selection process, and thus provide a better exploration of phenotypic diversity, we show that it may represent a valid strategy in both natural and technological cases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据