Theoretical biologist and advisor to data scientists at the University of Arizona. Mostly theoretical population genetics and molecular evolution, but I've also published in biochemistry, infectious disease, aging, economics, education. Opinions are my own
Joanna Masel
Loading...
Calling all Scientists! Research Administrators! Deans! Fans of Science! No one is coming to save us. Here is your assignment. I have written a step by step, easy to understand "how-to" document to help you comment on the proposed OMB rule. elizabethginexi.substack.com/p/what-we-ne...
Meltdown only becomes more important when beneficial mutations are not so rare compared to deleterious mutations. So population genetics should never ignore beneficials over long timescales: either they are common, or their limiting nature is critical. 5/5
These are both long-term dangers. A shortage of standing genetic variation is more urgent than a shortage of new beneficial mutations, and a rise in inbreeding depression is more urgent than deleterious fixations. 3/5
New beneficial mutations are eventually needed not only to counter environmental change, but also to compensate for fixed deleterious mutations. Mutational drought exceeds mutational meltdown even in the conservative case where the latter kind of fitness loss exceeds the former. 4/5
