Source author record

Alexander J. Stewart

Alexander J. Stewart appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

8works
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Eco-evolutionary tradeoffs in the dynamics of prion strain competition

Prion and prion-like molecules are a type of self replicating aggregate protein that have been implicated in a variety of neurodegenerative diseases. Over recent decades the molecular dynamics of prions have been characterized both empirically and through mathematical models, providing insights into the epidemiology of prion diseases, and the impact of prions on the evolution of cellular processes. At the same time, a variety of evidence indicates that prions are themselves capable of a form of evolution, in which changes to their structure that impact their rate of growth or fragmentation are replicated, making such changes subject to natural selection. Here we study the role of such selection in shaping the characteristics of prions under the nucleated polymerization model (NPM). We show that fragmentation rates evolve to an evolutionary stable value which balances rapid reproduction of $PrP^{Sc}$ aggregates with the need to produce stable polymers. We further show that this evolved fragmentation rate differs in general from the rate that optimizes transmission between cells. We find that under the NPM, prions that are both evolutionary stable and optimized for transmission have a characteristic length of $3n$, i.e three times the critical length below which they become unstable. Finally we study the dynamics of inter-cellular competition between strains, and show that the eco-evolutionary tradeoff between intra- and inter-cellular competition favors coexistence.

preprint2022arXiv

Group reciprocity and the evolution of stereotyping

Stereotypes are generalized beliefs about groups of people, which are used to make decisions and judgments about them. Although such heuristics can be useful when decisions must be made quickly, or when information is lacking, they can also serve as the basis for prejudice and discrimination. In this paper we study the evolution of stereotypes through group reciprocity. We characterize the warmth of a stereotype as the willingness to cooperate with an individual based solely on the identity of the group they belong to. We show that when stereotypes are coarse, such group reciprocity is less likely to evolve, and stereotypes tend to be negative. We also show that, even when stereotypes are broadly positive, individuals are often overly pessimistic about the willingness of those they stereotype to cooperate. We then show that the tendency for stereotyping itself to evolve is driven by the costs of cognition, so that more people are stereotyped with greater coarseness as costs increase. Finally we show that extrinsic "shocks", in which the benefits of cooperation are suddenly reduced, can cause stereotype warmth and judgement bias to turn sharply negative, consistent with the view that economic and other crises are drivers of out-group animosity.

preprint2020arXiv

The natural selection of good science

Scientists in some fields are concerned that many, or even most, published results are false. A high rate of false positives might arise accidentally, from shoddy research practices. Or it might be the inevitable result of institutional incentives that reward publication irrespective of veracity. Recent models and discussion of scientific culture predict selection for false-positive publications, as research labs that publish more positive findings out-compete more diligent labs. There is widespread debate about how scientific practices should be modified to avoid this degeneration. Some analyses suggest that "bad science" will persist even when labs are incentivized to undertake replication studies, and penalized for publications that later fail to replicate. Here we develop a framework for modelling the cultural evolution of research practices that allows labs to expend effort on theory - enabling them, at a cost, to focus on hypotheses that are more likely to be true on theoretical grounds. Theory restores the evolution of high effort in laboratory practice, and it suppresses false-positive publications to a technical minimum, even in the absence of replication. In fact, the mere ability choose between two sets of hypotheses - one with greater chance of being correct than the other - promotes better science than can be achieved by having effortless access to the better set of hypotheses. Combining theory and replication can have a synergistic effect in promoting good scientific methodology and reducing the rate of false-positive publications. Based on our analysis we propose four simple rules to promote good science in the face of pressure to publish.

preprint2015arXiv

Small games and long memories promote cooperation

Complex social behaviors lie at the heart of many of the challenges facing evolutionary biology, sociology, economics, and beyond. For evolutionary biologists in particular the question is often how such behaviors can arise \textit{de novo} in a simple evolving system. How can group behaviors such as collective action, or decision making that accounts for memories of past experience, emerge and persist? Evolutionary game theory provides a framework for formalizing these questions and admitting them to rigorous study. Here we develop such a framework to study the evolution of sustained collective action in multi-player public-goods games, in which players have arbitrarily long memories of prior rounds of play and can react to their experience in an arbitrary way. To study this problem we construct a coordinate system for memory-$m$ strategies in iterated $n$-player games that permits us to characterize all the cooperative strategies that resist invasion by any mutant strategy, and thus stabilize cooperative behavior. We show that while larger games inevitably make cooperation harder to evolve, there nevertheless always exists a positive volume of strategies that stabilize cooperation provided the population size is large enough. We also show that, when games are small, longer-memory strategies make cooperation easier to evolve, by increasing the number of ways to stabilize cooperation. Finally we explore the co-evolution of behavior and memory capacity, and we find that longer-memory strategies tend to evolve in small games, which in turn drives the evolution of cooperation even when the benefits for cooperation are low.

preprint2014arXiv

The collapse of cooperation in evolving games

Game theory provides a quantitative framework for analyzing the behavior of rational agents. The Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma in particular has become a standard model for studying cooperation and cheating, with cooperation often emerging as a robust outcome in evolving populations. Here we extend evolutionary game theory by allowing players' strategies as well as their payoffs to evolve in response to selection on heritable mutations. In nature, many organisms engage in mutually beneficial interactions, and individuals may seek to change the ratio of risk to reward for cooperation by altering the resources they commit to cooperative interactions. To study this, we construct a general framework for the co-evolution of strategies and payoffs in arbitrary iterated games. We show that, as payoffs evolve, a trade-off between the benefits and costs of cooperation precipitates a dramatic loss of cooperation under the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma; and eventually to evolution away from the Prisoner's Dilemma altogether. The collapse of cooperation is so extreme that the average payoff in a population may decline, even as the potential payoff for mutual cooperation increases. Our work offers a new perspective on the Prisoner's Dilemma and its predictions for cooperation in natural populations; and it provides a general framework to understand the co-evolution of strategies and payoffs in iterated interactions.

preprint2013arXiv

From extortion to generosity, the evolution of zero-determinant strategies in the prisoner's dilemma

Recent work has revealed a new class of "zero-determinant" (ZD) strategies for iterated, two-player games. ZD strategies allow a player to unilaterally enforce a linear relationship between her score and her opponent's score, and thus achieve an unusual degree of control over both players' long-term payoffs. Although originally conceived in the context of classical, two-player game theory, ZD strategies also have consequences in evolving populations of players. Here we explore the evolutionary prospects for ZD strategies in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD). Several recent studies have focused on the evolution of "extortion strategies" - a subset of zero-determinant strategies - and found them to be unsuccessful in populations. Nevertheless, we identify a different subset of ZD strategies, called "generous ZD strategies", that forgive defecting opponents, but nonetheless dominate in evolving populations. For all but the smallest population sizes, generous ZD strategies are not only robust to being replaced by other strategies, but they also can selectively replace any non-cooperative ZD strategy. Generous strategies can be generalized beyond the space of ZD strategies, and they remain robust to invasion. When evolution occurs on the full set of all IPD strategies, selection disproportionately favors these generous strategies. In some regimes, generous strategies outperform even the most successful of the well-known Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies, including win-stay-lose-shift.

preprint2012arXiv

The evolution of complex gene regulation by low specificity binding sites

Transcription factor binding sites vary in their specificity, both within and between species. Binding specificity has a strong impact on the evolution of gene expression, because it determines how easily regulatory interactions are gained and lost. Nevertheless, we have a relatively poor understanding of what evolutionary forces determine the specificity of binding sites. Here we address this question by studying regulatory modules composed of multiple binding sites. Using a population-genetic model, we show that more complex regulatory modules, composed of a greater number of binding sites, must employ binding sites that are individually less specific, compared to less complex regulatory modules. This effect is extremely general, and it hold regardless of the regulatory logic of a module. We attribute this phenomenon to the inability of stabilising selection to maintain highly specific sites in large regulatory modules. Our analysis helps to explain broad empirical trends in the yeast regulatory network: those genes with a greater number of transcriptional regulators feature by less specific binding sites, and there is less variance in their specificity, compared to genes with fewer regulators. Likewise, our results also help to explain the well-known trend towards lower specificity in the transcription factor binding sites of higher eukaryotes, which perform complex regulatory tasks, compared to prokaryotes.

preprint2012arXiv

Under-dominance constrains the evolution of negative autoregulation in diploids

Regulatory networks have evolved to allow gene expression to rapidly track changes in the environment as well as to buffer perturbations and maintain cellular homeostasis in the absence of change. Theoretical work and empirical investigation in Escherichia coli have shown that negative autoregulation confers both rapid response times and reduced intrinsic noise, which is reflected in the fact that almost half of Escherichia coli transcription factors are negatively autoregulated. However, negative autoregulation is exceedingly rare amongst the transcription factors of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. This difference is all the more surprising because E. coli and S. cerevisiae otherwise have remarkably similar profiles of network motifs. In this study we first show that regulatory interactions amongst the transcription factors of Drosophila melanogaster and humans have a similar dearth of negative autoregulation to that seen in S. cerevisiae. We then present a model demonstrating that this fundamental difference in the noise reduction strategies used amongst species can be explained by constraints on the evolution of negative autoregulation in diploids. We show that regulatory interactions between pairs of homologous genes within the same cell can lead to under-dominance - mutations which result in stronger autoregulation, and decrease noise in homozygotes, paradoxically can cause increased noise in heterozygotes. This severely limits a diploid's ability to evolve negative autoregulation as a noise reduction mechanism. Our work offers a simple and general explanation for a previously unexplained difference between the regulatory architectures of E. coli and yeast, Drosophila and humans. It also demonstrates that the effects of diploidy in gene networks can have counter-intuitive consequences that may profoundly influence the course of evolution.