Back

The Age of Selection-Duality Mutation under Fluctuating Selection among Individuals (FSI)

Gu, X.

2026-02-02 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.01.30.701161 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Our recent work on molecular evolution and population genetics postulated that individuals with a specific mutation exhibit a fluctuation in fitness, short for FSI (fluctuating selection among individuals), whereas the fitness effect of wildtype remains a constant. An intriguing phenomenon called selection-duality emerges, that is, a slightly beneficial mutation could be a negative selection (the substitution rate less than the mutation rate). It appears that selection-duality is bounded by two bounds: the generic neutrality where the mutation is neutral by the means of fitness on average, and the substitution neutrality where the substitution rate equals to the mutation rate. In addition, the middle point of generic neutrality and substitution neutrality is called the FSI-neutrality. An important problem is about the age profile of allele frequency, i.e., the arising timing of a mutation whose frequency in the current population is given (the allele-age problem for short). Solving this problem under selection duality would help extend the standard coalescent theory that based on strict neutrality to a more general form under selection duality. In this paper, we studied the allele-age problem under selection-duality by the first arrival time approach and the mean age approach, respectively. Since the general solution of allele-age problem under selection duality is not available, we focused on solving the problem at the substitution neutrality (the up-bound of selection duality), the FSI-neutrality (the middle-point) and the generic neutrality (the low-bound), respectively. Our analysis results in an overall picture that the mean first-arrival age of a mutation at the substitution neutrality is theoretically identical to that at the FSI-neutrality, which is numerically close to that at the generic neutrality. For illustration, we calculated the mean age of nonsynonymous mutations in the human population and demonstrated that the estimated allele-age could be overestimated considerably when the effect of FSI was neglected.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Theoretical Population Biology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.0%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 3%
9.8%
3
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.6%
4
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.1%
5
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.1%
6
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.7%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.6%
9
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 32%
2.6%
10
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.5%
11
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 26%
2.5%
12
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
13
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
14
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
15
Quantitative Biology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.6%
16
Physical Review E
95 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
17
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
18
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.1%
19
Genome Biology and Evolution
280 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
22
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.9%
23
Entropy
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
Journal of Computational Biology
37 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
25
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.7%
27
Physical Review Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
28
National Science Review
22 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
29
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Journal of Mathematical Biology
37 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%