Back

Mapping Gene Drive Dynamics onto Mendelian Models

Wen, Z.; Wan, M.; Greenbaum, G.; Carja, O.

2026-01-30 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.01.28.702305 bioRxiv
Show abstract

CRISPR-based gene drives bias their own transmission and can spread even when deleterious, giving rise to evolutionary dynamics that can be substantially more complex than those governed by standard Mendelian inheritance. Identifying conditions under which gene-drive dynamics can be faithfully approximated by Mendelian models would therefore enable the extensive theoretical toolkit of classical population genetics to be applied to gene-drive systems. Here, we develop a general mapping framework that translates gene-drive models into dynamically equivalent Mendelian models, allowing their behavior to be analyzed using classical theory. By deriving both haploid and diploid effective-parameter mappings, we identify Mendelian models that closely reproduce allele-frequency trajectories of gene drives across a wide range of conversion rates, fitness costs, and dominance effects. We delineate the regions of the parameter space where a one-parameter haploid approximation provides an accurate first-order representation, and where incorporating dominance in a diploid mapping substantially improves fidelity and recovers internal equilibria and threshold behavior. Analytic approximations yield efficient mappings across most of the drive parameter space, while a trajectory-based grid search further improves accuracy near nonlinear regime boundaries. To demonstrate the utility of this framework, we apply it to predicting gene swamping in a two-deme migration-selection model and show that the mapped Mendelian system accurately forecasts transitions between fixation and loss under three relevant release scenarios: environmental variation in fitness, engineered fitness asymmetries, and environment-dependent conversion. Together, these results establish a theoretical bridge between non-Mendelian gene drives and classical population genetic models, providing an interpretable and computationally efficient foundation for predicting gene-drive outcomes and guiding the design of gene drive systems and deployment strategies.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.8%
2
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 4%
12.3%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.8%
4
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.8%
50% of probability mass above
5
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.3%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.2%
7
Nature Ecology & Evolution
113 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
8
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 28%
3.2%
9
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.7%
10
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
The American Journal of Human Genetics
206 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
13
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
14
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
15
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
16
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.2%
17
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.9%
18
Evolution Letters
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
19
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 73%
0.8%
20
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
21
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 71%
0.6%
22
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%