Skip to main content
. 2007 Oct;177(2):971–986. doi: 10.1534/genetics.107.073791

TABLE 2.

Average rate of fitness loss with an exponential distribution of s-values

Na UN Inline graphic Replb Inline graphicc (×106) Nebd U2Nebe s2Nebf Inline graphicg (×106) Inline graphich (×106)
500 3 10 3 1.5 (0.04) 419 0.671 2.41 0.84 0.39
500 10 0.1 2 3.4 (0.05) 500 4.5 × 10−4 1.10 ∼0 3.3
500 10 1 2 15 (0.001) 484 3.29 1.83 7.4 (5.6) 5.9
500 10 10 2 12 (0.5) 323 2.06 2.38 8.0 (8.1) 2.2
500 10 30 2 3.2 (0.03) 333 0.883 2.46 2.0 0.72
500 10 100 4 0.49 (0.03) 391 0.289 2.49 0.26 0.16
500 25 5 3 72 (1.1) 283 6.50 2.24 54 (52) 13
500 100 1 3 220 (0.5) 425 25.5 1.76 120 (110) 71
500 100 10 2 630 (5) 147 13.4 2.25 530 (500) 94
500 100 100 5 120 (4) 124 2.71 2.47 80 (88) 16
5000 1000 10 2 160 (2) 740 65.4 2.03 140 (130) 31
5000 1000 100 2 310 (6) 245 18.3 2.35 280 (280) 36
5000 1000 1000 4 12 (0.2) 412 2.91 2.49 8.2 (8.8) 1.4
5000 1000 10 (As above) 898i 90i 2.33i 150i 22i
5000 1000 100 (As above) 294i 24.4i 2.79i 310i 26i
5000 1000 1000 (As above) 456i 38.3i 3.00i 9.0i 1.2i
a

Population size of the corresponding Wright–Fisher model.

b

Number of replicate runs.

c

Rate of fitness loss calculated from the simulation using the exponentially distributed s-values in a Moran model with population size 2N: in parentheses, the standard deviation in the replicate runs is shown. Runs were between 104 and 2.14×106 generations; for each parameter combination, at least one run was longer than 2×105 generations.

d

Effective population size calculated from the integral in Equation 12.

e

Effective mutation rate in category 2 from Equation 10.

f

Effective selection coefficient in category 2 from Equation 11.

g

Rate of fitness loss in category 2 calculated as s2Inline graphic from a 1D simulation with parameters Neb, U2, and s2 (within parentheses, calculation using Equation 14).

h

Rate of fitness loss in category 3 calculated from the integral in Equation 13.

i

Predicted results when the border to category 1 is at sNeb > 5.