Heterozygote advantage cannot explain MHC diversity, but MHC diversity can explain heterozygote advantage
Cherry, J. L.
Show abstract
Several theoretical studies have concluded that heterozygote advantage makes at most a minor contribution to MHC diversity. Siljestam and Rueffler (2024) recently presented models in which heterozygote advantage alone can lead to realistically high diversity. Here I argue that heterozygote advantage cannot by itself explain MHC diversity, and that its contribution to diversity is unlikely to be large in most species. I first show that the high diversity reported by Siljestam and Rueffler is so sensitive to parameter values that the underlying phenomenon cannot explain the widespread diversity of MHC genes. I then consider a fundamental problem with explaining MHC diversity by heterozygote advantage alone: selective forces that favored heterozygotes would lead to the evolution of haplotypes having much higher fitness when homozygous, diminishing or eliminating heterozygote advantage. Diversity maintained by another force, however, might bring about adaptation to the more common heterozygous state at the expense of homozygous fitness. Thus, substantial heterozygote advantage may arise as a consequence of MHC diversity.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Immune Heterogeneity and Epistasis Explain Punctuated Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 96%
- The evolutionary cost of homophily: social stratification facilitates stable variant coexistence and increased rates of evolution in host-associated pathogens 95%
- The evolutionary origin of the universal distribution of mutation fitness effect 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.