This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Fig. 1
Schematic representation of a mortality function for directional selection.
Fig. 2
Non-zero equilibrium solutions of Eq. (2) with Neumann (left) and Dirichlet (right) boundary conditions, respectively. For this simulation we consider μ(x) = 0.15(5 − x). These simulations show the typical behaviour of evolution by directional selection.
Fig. 3
Schematic representation of a mortality function for disruptive selection.
Fig. 4
Numerical simulations of nonzero equilibrium solutions for Eq. (2) with Neumann (left) and Dirichlet (right) boundary conditions, respectively. Here we consider μ(x) = max{0,0.192(6.25 − x2)}. These simulations show the typical behaviour of evolution by disruptive selection.
Fig. 5
Schematic representation of a mortality function for stabilising selection.
Fig. 6
Numerical simulations of nonzero equilibrium solutions for Eq. (2) with Neumann (left) and Dirichlet (right) boundary conditions, respectively. For these simulations we consider μ(x) = min{0.184x2,1.15}. These simulations show the typical evolution behaviour by stabilising selection.
Fig. 7
Numerical simulation showing the transition from the fittest to the flattest as the mutation rate increases. Left: the function μ(x); right: the soultion for small V. Here, the horizontal line is y = 1.
Fig. 8
Numerical simulation showing the transition from the fittest to the flattest as mutation rate increases. Left V = 0.4; right V = 0.52.
Fig. 9
Numerical simulation showing the transition from the fittest to the flattest as the mutation rate increases. Left V = 0.54; right V = 0.7.