>>14374081I literally don't have time , anon.
been working all day, plus you want me to explain how these structures developed? u know that's embryology right? that's an entire course in any university not only that population genetic courses are 1 year long.
in short:
Let's say you have a clearly beneficial mutation with a huge selection coefficient of 0.1 (s = 0.1). Population genetics tells us that the probability of fixation is 2s or, in this case, 20%. That means that the allele will be eliminated from the population 80% of the time. That's random genetic drift. Similarly, some fairly deleterious mutations can sometimes be fixed by random genetic drift.
If the mutation rate per locus is ?, and the size of the population is N, so there are 2N copies of each gene, then the absolute number of mutations that will appear in a population per generation at a given locus is 2N?. But the probability that any given mutation is eventually incorporated is 1/2N so the absolute number of new mutations that will be incorporated per generation per locus is (2Nµ)(1/2N) = µ If there are k loci mutating, then in each generation there will be k? newly incorporated mutations in the genome.
This is an important conclusion. It shows that alleles are fixed in large populations by random genetic drift. this means that patterns like those in your picture are not "impossible" by any means.
deleterious alleles and neutral alleles are fixated all the time and thus explains complexity you only need a few selected mutations to form these pattern. the rest is evo devo.
