Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Selection differentials and selection coefficients.

R Milkman1

  • 1Department of Zoology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242.

Genetics
|February 1, 1978
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Molecular evolution of the Escherichia coli chromosome. V. Recombination patterns among strains of diverse origin.

Genetics·1999
Same author

Recombination and population structure in Escherichia coli.

Genetics·1997
Same author

Identity of the Escherichia coli cls and nov genes.

Journal of bacteriology·1995
Same author

Transduction, restriction and recombination patterns in Escherichia coli.

Genetics·1995
Same author

An Escherichia coli homologue of eukaryotic potassium channel proteins.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·1994
Same author

Molecular evolution of the Escherichia coli chromosome. IV. Sequence comparisons.

Genetics·1993
Same journal

Coexistence of piRNA and KZFP defense systems: Evolutionary dynamics of layered defense against transposable elements.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Creation and manipulation of bipartite expression transgenes in C. elegans using phiC31 recombinase.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Inherited long telomeres induce a genome-wide transcriptional response in budding yeast.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Adaptive Dynamics of Quantitative Traits in a Steadily Changing Environment.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Functional Landscape of Zebrafish Gonadotropins and Receptors: A Comprehensive Genetic Analysis.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Synergistic actions of Nup43 and Myosin VI drive actin cone assembly during Drosophila spermiogenesis.

Genetics·2026
See all related articles

This study demonstrates that the selection coefficient (s) approximates the product of the standard selection differential (i) and the standard differential effect of a locus genotype (g) across various selection forms. It also shows that selection costs do not limit genetic polymorphism.

Area of Science:

  • Evolutionary biology
  • Population genetics
  • Quantitative genetics

Background:

  • Understanding the relationship between selection intensity and genetic variation is crucial in evolutionary studies.
  • Previous models often assumed specific forms of selection, limiting generalizability.
  • The cost of natural selection and its impact on genetic diversity remain areas of active research.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To establish a general relationship between the selection coefficient (s) and measures of selection intensity (i) and genotypic effect (g).
  • To investigate whether the cost of selection inherently limits genic polymorphism.
  • To evaluate the necessity of truncation selection for cost-efficiency and the impact of heterogeneous environments on selection efficiency.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Mathematical modeling of selection processes.
  • Analysis of fitness functions as nondecreasing functions of a normally distributed phenotype (fitness potential).
  • Derivation of theoretical relationships between selection parameters.

    • Main Results:

    • Proof that s ≈ ig for all selection forms where fitness is a nondecreasing function of a normally distributed phenotype.
    • Evidence that the cost of selection does not limit genic polymorphism.
    • Demonstration that truncation selection is not essential for high cost-efficiency.
    • Findings indicate that opposing selection directions in heterogeneous environments do not critically reduce cost-efficiency.

    Conclusions:

    • The derived relationship (s ≈ ig) offers a more general framework for understanding selection.
    • The cost of selection may not be a primary constraint on maintaining genetic polymorphism.
    • Efficient selection can be achieved without relying solely on truncation selection, even in complex environments.