Tracing the Path of a Wright-Fisher Process with One-way Mutation in the Case of a Large Deviation
The large deviations theory developed by Wentzell for discrete time Markov chains is used to show that if the state of a Wright-Fisher process modeling the frequency of an allele in a biological population undergoes a transition from one value to another over a number of generations which is large but much smaller than the size of the population, then there is a preferred path which the process follows closely with near certainty in the intervening time. This path was identified in _in the case in which there is only random drift acting on the genes. The case in which one-way mutation is added to the drift was cursorily mentioned in _and is fully treated here. The preferred path in this case is shown to be an exponential, a parabola, a hyperbolic cosine or a trigonometric cosine, depending on the mutation parameter and the boundary conditions involved.
KeywordsWright-Fisher process mutation large deviations action functional calculus of variations
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ewens, W.J.: Mathematical Population Genetics. Biomathematics Vol. 9. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.Google Scholar
- Gelfand, I.M. and Fomin, S.V.: Calculus of Variations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1963.Google Scholar
- Kimura, M.: Diffusion Models in Population Genetics. Methuen’s Review Series in Applied Probability, Methuen, London, 1964.Google Scholar
- Natanson, LP.: Theorie der Punktionen einer Reellen Veränderlichen. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1961.Google Scholar
- Papangelou, F.: Large deviations of the Wright-Fisher process. Proceedings of the Athens Conference on Applied Probability and Time Series Analysis, Vol.1: Applied Probability (eds. C.C. Heyde, Yu. V. Prohorov, R. Pyke, S.T. Rachev). Lecture Notes in Statistics 114, 245–252, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.Google Scholar
- Wentzell, A.D.: Rough limit theorems on large deviations for Markov processes, Th. Probab. Appl. 21 (1976), 227–242 and 499-512; 24 (1979), 675-692; 27 (1982), 215-234.Google Scholar