Skip to main content
Log in

A Wright–Fisher model with indirect selection

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study a generalization of the Wright–Fisher model in which some individuals adopt a behavior that is harmful to others without any direct advantage for themselves. This model is motivated by studies of spiteful behavior in nature, including several species of parasitoid hymenoptera in which sperm-depleted males continue to mate despite not being fertile. We first study a single reproductive season, then use it as a building block for a generalized Wright–Fisher model. In the large population limit, for male-skewed sex ratios, we rigorously derive the convergence of the renormalized process to a diffusion with a frequency-dependent selection and genetic drift. This allows a quantitative comparison of the indirect selective advantage with the direct one classically considered in the Wright–Fisher model. From the mathematical point of view, each season is modeled by a mix between samplings with and without replacement, and analyzed by a sort of “reverse numerical analysis”, viewing a key recurrence relation as a discretization scheme for a PDE. The diffusion approximation is then obtained by classical methods.

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

Notes

  1. Let us recall the unfortunate polysemy of the word “drift”. In the biological literature “genetic drift” corresponds to the noise-induced variations. When using a stochastic model, this is at odds with the “drift” of a diffusion, i.e. the first order term that models a deterministic force.

  2. Personal communication.

  3. Personal communication.

References

  • Barbour AD, Holst L, Janson S (1992) Poisson approximation. Oxford studies in probability, vol 2. The Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press/Oxford Science Publications, New York

  • Champagnat N, Ferriere R, Meleard S (2006) Unifying evolutionary dynamics: from individual stochastic processes to macroscopic models. Theor Popul Biol 69(3):297–321

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Champagnat N, Ferrière R, Méléard S (2008) From individual stochastic processes to macroscopic models in adaptive evolution. Stoch Models 24(suppl. 1):2–44

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chalub FACC, Souza MO (2009) A non-standard evolution problem arising in population genetics. Commun Math Sci 7(2):489–502

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chalub FACC, Souza MO (2014) The frequency-dependent Wright–Fisher model: diffusive and non-diffusive approximations. J Math Biol 68(5):1089–1133

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Damiens D, Boivin G (2006) Why do sperm-depleted parasitoid males continue to mate? Behav Ecol 17(1):138–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dionisio F (2007) Selfish and spiteful behaviour through parasites and pathogens. Evol Ecol Res 9(7):1199–1210

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrett R (1996) Stochastic calculus: a practical introduction. Probability and stochastics series. CRC Press INC, Boca Raton

  • Durrett R (2008) Probability models for DNA sequence evolution, 2nd edn. Probability and its applications (New York). Springer, New York

  • Ethier SN, Kurtz TG (1986) Markov processes: characterization and convergence. Wiley series in probability and mathematical atatistics: probability and mathematical statistics. Wiley, New York

  • Etheridge A (2011) Some mathematical models from population genetics. Lecture notes in mathematics, vol 2012. Springer, Heidelberg. (Lectures from the 39th Probability Summer School held in Saint-Flour, 2009)

  • Ewens WJ (2004) Mathematical population genetics. I: theoretical introduction, 2nd edn. Interdisciplinary applied mathematics, vol 27. Springer, New York

  • Foster KR, Wenseleers T, Ratnieks FLW (2001) Spite: Hamilton’s unproven theory. Ann Zool Fenn 38(3–4):229–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie JH (1974) Nautural selection for within-generation variance in offspring number. Genetics 76(3):601–606

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie JH (1975) Natural selection for within-generation variance in offspring number II. Discrite haploid models. Genetics 81(2):403–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimmett GR, Stirzaker DR (2001) Probability and random processes, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1970) Selfish and spiteful behaviour in an evolutionary model. Nature 228(5277):1218–1220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janson S (1994) Large deviation inequalities for sums of indicator variables. Technical Report No. 34, Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University

  • Joag-Dev K, Proschan F (1983) Negative association of random variables, with applications. Ann Stat 11(1):286–295

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lessard S (2005) Long-term stability from fixation probabilities in finite populations: new perspectives for ESS theory. Theor Popul Biol 68(1):19–27

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • McKane AJ, Waxman D (2007) Singular solutions of the diffusion equation of population genetics. J Theor Biol 247(4):849–858

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rice WR (1996) Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature 381(6579):232–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross N (2011) Fundamentals of Stein’s method. Probab Surv 8:210–293

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Radhakrishnan P, Pérez-Staples D, Weldon CW, Taylor PW (2009) Multiple mating and sperm depletion in male Queensland fruit flies: effects on female remating behaviour. Anim Behav 78(4):839–846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shpak M (2007) Selection against demographic stochasticity in age-structured populations. Genetics 177(4):2181–2194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner S, Henrich N, Ruther J (2008) Mating with sperm-depleted males does not increase female mating frequency in the parasitoid Lariophagus distinguendus. Entomol Exp Appl 126(2):131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor JE (2009) The genealogical consequences of fecundity variance polymorphism. Genetics 182(3):813–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waxman D (2011) Comparison and content of the Wright–Fisher model of random genetic drift, the diffusion approximation, and an intermediate model. J Theor Biol 269:79–87

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper stems from discussions with the biologists F.-X. Dechaume-Moncharmont and M. Galipaud, who came up with the single generation model for “indirect” fitness. We thank them for stimulating discussions on the biological aspects of the problem. On the mathematical side, our special thanks go to R. Eymard for his input on the inverse numerical analysis problem; we also thank V.-C. Tran and D. Coupier for interesting discussions. Finally we thank J.E. Taylor and an anonymous reviewer for many valuable comments on a preliminary version of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ludovic Goudenège.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goudenège, L., Zitt, PA. A Wright–Fisher model with indirect selection. J. Math. Biol. 71, 1411–1450 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-015-0859-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-015-0859-2

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation