First lets look at a system where we have genotypes that have fitness defined as \(1+s\). However, we might want \(s\) to have both positive and negative values so that we can have beneficial and deleterious mutations. Will the same absolute value of \(s\) have a proportionally strong impact whether it is positive or negative? Below we see what happens:
f <- function(s) 1+s
s <- seq(from = 0, to = 0.9, length.out = 100)
par(mfcol=c(1,2))
plot(x = s, y = 1/f(s),
col ="blue",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s>0")
plot(x = s, y = f(-s)/1,
col ="red",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s<0")
Because fitness is always normalized the same absolute values of \(s\) cause differences in the relative deviation from a fitness of 1. In this case deleterious mutations have a larger effect than beneficial mutations particularly as \(s\) becomes large.
There is pretty straight forward fix for this problem. Instead of having \(1+s\) and varying \(s\) to include both positive and negative we instead us \(1+s\) for beneficial mutations and \(\frac{1}{1+s}\) for deleterious mutations
f1 <- function(s) 1+s
f2 <- function(s) 1/(1+s)
s <- seq(from = 0, to = 0.9, length.out = 100)
par(mfcol=c(1,2))
plot(x = s, y = 1/f1(s),
col ="blue",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s>0")
plot(x = s, y = f2(s)/1,
col ="red",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s<0")
What if the original formulation was in 1-s? The same problem would exist
f <- function(s) 1-s
s <- seq(from = 0, to = 0.9, length.out = 100)
par(mfcol=c(1,2))
plot(x = s, y = f(s)/1,
col ="blue",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s>0")
plot(x = s, y = 1/f(-s),
col ="red",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s<0")
However we can fix it in exactly the same way: we will now use \(1-s\) for deleterious and \(\frac{1}{1-s}\) for beneficial.
f1 <- function(s) 1-s
f2 <- function(s) 1/(1-s)
s <- seq(from = 0, to = 0.9, length.out = 100)
par(mfcol=c(1,2))
plot(x = s, y = f1(s)/1,
col ="blue",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s>0")
plot(x = s, y = 1/f2(s),
col ="red",
ylim = c(0, 1),
ylab = "proportional change in fitness",
pch = 16, cex = .6,
main="s<0")
We now have a way to give beneficial and deleterious mutations symmetrical strength using either the \(1-s\) or \(1+s\) starting point. It should be noted though that in the case of the \(1+s\) approach as \(s\) becomes large its impact on fitness plateaus. in contrast the \(1-s\) the effect is linear across values of \(s\).