Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Coalescent Size Versus Coalescent Time with Strong Selection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This work studies the coalescent (ancestral pedigree, genealogy) of the entire population. The coalescent structure (topology) is robust, but selection changes the rate of coalescence (the time between branching events). The change in the rate of coalescence is not uniform, rather the reduction in the time between branching events is greatest when the coalescent is small (immediately after the common ancestor is the only member of the coalescent) with little change when the coalescent is large (immediately preceding when that common ancestor becomes fixed and the size of the coalescent is N). This provides that the reduction in the coalescent time due to selection is much greater than the reduction in the cumulative size of the coalescent (total number of ancestors of the present population after and including the most recent common ancestor) due to selection. If Ns ≫ 1, the coalescent and fixation times are approximately equal to \( \tfrac{{\ln 2N s}} {s} \) , which is much less than the value N which would result from neutral drift (N rather than the canonical haploid neutral fixation time 2N is the appropriate comparison for the model considered here), in particular, it is 70% less for Ns=10 and 95% less for Ns=100. However, for those values of Ns, and N ranging between 103 and 106, the reduction in the cumulative size of the coalescent of the entire population compared to the neutral case ranges from 17% to 65% (depending on the values of N and s). The coalescent time for two individuals for Ns of 10 and 100 is reduced by approximately 70% and 94%, respectively, compared with the neutral case. Because heterozygosity is proportional to the coalescent time for two individuals and the number of segregating alleles is proportional to the cumulative size of the coalescent, selection reduces heterozygosity more than it reduces the number of segregating alleles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barton, N., 2000. Genetic hitchhiking. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 355, 1553–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton, N., Etheridge, A., 2004. The effect of selection on genealogies. Genetics 166, 1115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R., 1999. The coalescent time in the presence of background fertility selection. Theor. Popul. Biol. 55, 260–69.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R., 2003. A logistic branching process for population genetics. J. Theor. Biol. 225, 195–03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, R., Fuerst, P., Nei, M., 1980. Statistical studies on protein polymorphism in natural populations. III. Distribution of allele frequencies and the number of alleles per locus. Genetics 94, 1039–063.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, P., Tavaré, S., 1995. Coalescents and genealogical structure under neutrality. Annu. Rev. Genet. 29, 401–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durrett, R., 2002. Probability Models for DNA Sequence Evolution. Springer, New York.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Durrett, R., Schweinsberg, J., 2004. Approximating selective sweeps. Theor. Popul. Biol. 66, 129–38.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dykhuizen, D., 1990. Experimental studies of natural selection in bacteria. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 21, 373–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewens, W., 1979. Mathematical Population Genetics. Biomathematics, vol. 9. Springer, New York.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, R., Tavaré, S., 1994. Sampling theory for neutral alleles in a varying environment. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 344, 403–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, R., Tavaré, S., 1997. Computational methods for the coalescent. In: Donnelly, P., Tavaré, S. (Eds.), Progress in Population Genetics and Human Evolution, IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 87, pp. 165–82. Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holte, J., 1974. Extinction probability for a critical general branching process. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 2, 303–09.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kaj, I., Krone, S., 2003. The coalescent process in a population with stochastically varying size. J. Appl. Probab. 40, 33–8.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, N., Darden, T., Hudson, R., 1988. The coalescent process in models with selection. Genetics 120, 819–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlin, S., Taylor, H., 1975. A First Course in Stochastic Processes, 2 edn. Academic, New York.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, M., Ohta, T., 1969. The average number of generations until fixation of a mutant gene in a finite population. Genetics 61, 763–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingman, J., 1982a. The coalescent. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 13, 235–48.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kingman, J., 1982b. On the genealogy of large populations. J. Appl. Probab. 19A, 27–3.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Krone, S., Neuhauser, C., 1997. Ancestral processes with selection. Theor. Popul. Biol. 51, 210–37.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, J., 1971. What use is sex? J. Theor. Biol. 30, 319–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuhauser, C., Krone, S., 1997. The genealogy of samples in models with selection. Genetics 145, 519–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, N., 1993. Yule process approximation for the skeleton of a branching process. J. Appl. Probab. 30, 725–29.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Polanski, A., Bobrowski, A., Kimmel, M., 2003. A note on distributions of times to coalescence, under time-dependent population size. Theor. Popul. Biol. 63, 33–0.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, M. 2003. Estimating the time since the fixation of a beneficial allele. Genetics 164, 1667–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sano, A., Shimizu, A., Iizuka, M., 2004. Coalescent process with fluctuating population size and its effective size. Theor. Popul. Biol. 65, 39–8.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Slatkin, M., 1996. Gene genealogies within mutant allelic classes. Genetics 143, 579–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slatkin, M., Hudson, R., 1991. Pairwise comparisons of mitochondrial DNA sequences in stable and exponentially growing populations. Genetics 129, 555–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, W., Thomas Wiehe, T., Lenz, M., 1992. The effect of strongly selected substitutions on neutral polymorphism: Analytical results based on diffusion theory. Theor. Popul. Biol. 41, 237–54.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tajima, F., 1990. Relationship between DNA polymorphism and fixation time. Genetics 125, 447–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Herwaarden, O., van der Wal, H., 2002. Extinction time and age of an allele in a large finite population. Theor. Popul. Biol. 61, 311–18.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. B. Campbell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Campbell, R.B. Coalescent Size Versus Coalescent Time with Strong Selection. Bull. Math. Biol. 69, 2249–2259 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-007-9218-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-007-9218-9

Keywords

Navigation