Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: (2/s) ln(2N)

  1. #1 (2/s) ln(2N) 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3
    Hey, I'm brand new here. Hello everybody! Unfortunately, I am not very scientific but I have a scientific question to ask, well a few actually... They're probably more mathematical but ANYWAY!

    I'm looking into the fixation of a new allele (dominant or recessive)... and I understand (2/s) ln(2N) will give me an answer. Only, I have no idea WHAT (2/s) ln(2N) means in any way, shape or form... Well, TBH, I know 's' is the selection coefficient, for example 0.1 and 'N' is the population, for example 1 million. Heck, I even know that in (2/s) ln(2N) with s=0.1 and N=1,000,000 the answer is around 300. However, I have no idea WHY it's 300.

    Question number one - Could anyone possibly explain (2/s) ln(2N) to me in a way that a newborn baby could understand? And if that's asking too much, I will cut to the point and ask what I REALLY want to know.

    1. This new allele would have 3 edges. 1. People possessing it would be more willing to kill and do whatever it takes to stay alive. 2. People possessing it would actively hunt people not in possession of it. 3. People possessing it would have A LOT of children on account of r*pe and promiscuity. With these 3 things in mind, what number would you assign the new allele for it's selection coefficient... 's'?

    2. I would like to know how many generations it would take for this new allele to become fixed in a population of A. 1 million, B. 500,000, C. 200,000, D. 100,000, E. 50,000, F. 20,000 and G. 10,000.

    3. I don't know if dominance makes a difference but if it does, I would like to know the answers to 2 in the event of this new allele being A. dominant and B. recessive.

    Now, if someone can explain the formula to me, I'll be more than happy to do the legwork and figure out the answers to 1, 2 and 3 on my own! Or maybe you know of a piece of software, a kind of calculator that could help? Anyway, if it's easier to simply provide me the answers, I won't complain... :P

    I hope I'm not asking too much of you all but I will really appreciate any help you can provide!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  

    Related Discussions:

     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Climbing Air View Post
    1. People possessing it would be more willing to kill and do whatever it takes to stay alive.
    You made this easy.

    It will die out.

    If every person kills one other person, the population CAN NOT increase. If every person kills more than one person, the population goes extinct. Done.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Climbing Air View Post
    3. People possessing it would have A LOT of children on account of r*pe and promiscuity.
    Rape implies that the father will not be taking care of the child (or the female, for that matter). This lowers the chances of survival for the offspring. The allele is not looking good.


    You need to come up with a much better example.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3
    You made this easy.

    It will die out.

    If every person kills one other person, the population CAN NOT increase.
    They're not ALL killing. My point was, a person possessing this new allele would be more prepared to do what it takes to survive... killing was one example. If you'd like me to go into more detail I can. Your logic's a bit off anyway...

    If every person kills more than one person, the population goes extinct.Done.
    Not if every person has a couple of children too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by ericv00 View Post
    Rape implies that the father will not be taking care of the child (or the female, for that matter). This lowers the chances of survival for the offspring. The allele is not looking good.


    You need to come up with a much better example.
    Again... not EVERY person possessing the new allele would be raping but it's one example of how it could proliferate. And I don't think a lack of a father would be much of a problem anyway. Other people would be willing to fill the role... and everybody would pull together.

    I admit it's not perfect, and it's not meant to be... It's meant to be a destructive phenomenom. While the new allele would possess pros and cons, I believe its pros would outweigh the cons of not having it.

    You're taking what I say at face value a bit... I thought you'd figure it out but I am working on a piece of fiction, so I have a bit of room for creative control here. And the new allele is connected to the bigger picture.

    Now, I'd rather not get into a big debate :P so unless you have any relevant questions, I'd appreciate a few answers. If you want to hazard a guess and assign a selection coefficient, you can do that too... but it IS a beneficial allele.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor Zwirko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    55 N, 3 W
    Posts
    1,085
    Pop gen is not something I'm very familiar with, so ... maybe you could tell us more about the equation you are trying to use? To me it doesn't look capable of answering the questions you pose.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Climbing Air View Post
    You made this easy.

    It will die out.

    If every person kills one other person, the population CAN NOT increase.
    They're not ALL killing. My point was, a person possessing this new allele would be more prepared to do what it takes to survive... killing was one example. If you'd like me to go into more detail I can. Your logic's a bit off anyway...
    It is, is it?

    You are talking about an allele that causes this behavior. This means that possessors of this allele tend to act in this way. As it becomes more common in a population, the throttle on it is turned down as possessors of the allele tend to compete and kill others possessing the allele.

    If you are going to make this as vague as possible, just meaning drive to survive, the question is practically meaningless. This could mean anything. Drive to survive can just as well mean working with others to solve problems. It can even mean complacency with more aggressive individuals to avoid conflict.

    You need a much better example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Climbing Air View Post
    If every person kills more than one person, the population goes extinct.Done.
    Not if every person has a couple of children too!
    The children are more likely to possess this allele, making them more likely to kill others in competition. These individuals would interact with each other as much as with individuals without the allele.

    And are you saying that each person is a goofy sort who doesn't kill someone unless they have multiple children?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •