Paper detail

The multi-allelic Moran process as a multi-zealot voter model: exact results and consequences for diversity thresholds

The Moran process is a foundational model of genetic drift and mutation in finite populations. In its standard two-allele form with population size $n$, allele counts, and hence allele frequencies, change through stochastic replacement and mutation, yet converge to a stationary distribution. This distribution undergoes a qualitative transition at the \emph{critical mutation rate} $μ_c=1/(2n)$: at $μ=μ_c$ it is exactly uniform, so that the probability of observing $k$ copies of allele~1 (and $n-k$ of allele~2) is $π(k)=1/(n+1)$ for $k=0,\dots,n$. For $μ<μ_c$ diversity is low: the stationary distribution places most of its mass near $k=0$ and $k=n$, and the population is therefore typically dominated by one allele. For $μ>μ_c$, on the other hand, diversity is high: the distribution concentrates around intermediate values, so that both alleles are commonly present at comparable frequencies. Recently, the two-allele Moran process was shown to be exactly equivalent to the voter model with two candidates and $α_1$ and $α_2$ committed voters (\emph{zealots}) in a population of $n+α_1+α_2$, where mutation is played by zealot influence. Here we extend this equivalence to multiple alleles and multiple candidates. Using the mapping, we derive the exact stationary distribution of allele counts for well-mixed populations with an arbitrary number $m$ of alleles, and obtain the critical mutation rate $μ_c = 1/(m+2n-2)$, which depends explicitly on $m$. We then analyze the Moran process on randomly connected populations and show that both the stationary distribution and $μ_c$ are invariant to network structure and coincide with the well-mixed results. Finally, simulations on general network topologies show that structural heterogeneity can substantially reshape the stationary allele distribution and, consequently, the level of genetic diversity.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.