Xu-Sheng Zhang

Dr. Xu-Sheng Zhang


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

27Years (2000-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
31 October 2011 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PBPaul J. Birrell
Paul J. Birrell
GKGeorgios Ketsetzis
Georgios Ketsetzis
NGNigel J. Gay
Nigel J. Gay
BCBen S. Cooper
Ben S. Cooper
APAnne M. Presanis
Anne M. Presanis
DADaniela De Angelis
Daniela De Angelis
The tracking and projection of emerging epidemics is hindered by the disconnect between apparent epidemic dynamics, discernible from noisy and incomplete surveillance data, and the underlying, imperfectly observed, system. Behavior changes compound this, altering both true dynamics and reporting patterns, particularly for diseases with nonspecific symptoms, such as influenza. We disentangle these effects to unravel the hidden dynamics of the 2009 influenza A/H1N1pdm pandemic in London, where surveillance suggests an unusual dominant peak in the summer. We embed an age-structured model into a Bayesian synthesis of multiple evidence sources to reveal substantial changes in contact patterns and health-seeking behavior throughout the epidemic, uncovering two similar infection waves, despite large differences in the reported levels of disease. We show how this approach, which allows for real-time learning about model parameters as the epidemic progresses, is also able to provide a sequence of nested projections that are capable of accurately reflecting the epidemic evolution.

1 September 2005 in Trends in Ecology & Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
XZXu-Sheng Zhang
Xu-Sheng Zhang
WHWilliam G. Hill
William G. Hill

1 March 2012 in Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WHWilliam G. Hill
William G. Hill
XZXu-Sheng Zhang
Xu-Sheng Zhang
Analyses of effects of mutants on many traits have enabled estimates to be obtained of the magnitude of pleiotropy, and in reviews of such data others have concluded that the degree of pleiotropy is highly restricted, with implications on the evolvability of complex organisms. We show that these conclusions are highly dependent on statistical assumptions, for example significance levels. We analyze models with pleiotropic effects on all traits at all loci but by variable amounts, considering distributions of numbers of traits declared significant, overall pleiotropic effects, and extent of apparent modularity of effects. We demonstrate that these highly pleiotropic models can give results similar to those obtained in analyses of experimental data and that conclusions on limits to evolvability through pleiotropy are not robust.

1 April 2004 in Genetics Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WHWilliam G. Hill
William G. Hill
XZXu-Sheng Zhang
Xu-Sheng Zhang
In standard models of quantitative traits, genotypes are assumed to differ in mean but not variance of the trait. Here we consider directional selection for a quantitative trait for which genotypes also confer differences in variability, viewed either as differences in residual phenotypic variance when individual loci are concerned or as differences in environmental variability when the whole genome is considered. At an individual locus with additive effects, the selective value of the increasing allele is given by ia/σ+½ixb/σ2, where i is the selection intensity, x is the standardized truncation point, σ2 is the phenotypic variance, and a/σ and b/σ2 are the standardized differences in mean and variance respectively between genotypes at the locus. Assuming additive effects on mean and variance across loci, the response to selection on phenotype in mean is iσAm2/σ+½ixcovAmv/σ2 and in variance is icovAmv/σ+½ixσ2Av/σ2, where σAm2 is the (usual) additive genetic variance of effects of genes on the mean, σ2Av is the corresponding additive genetic variance of their effects on the variance, and covAmv is the additive genetic covariance of their effects. Changes in variance also have to be corrected for any changes due to gene frequency change and for the Bulmer effect, and relevant formulae are given. It is shown that effects on variance are likely to be greatest when selection is intense and when selection is on individual phenotype or within family deviation rather than on family mean performance. The evidence for and implications of such variability in variance are discussed.

1 August 2000 in Plant Pathology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
XZXu-Sheng Zhang
Xu-Sheng Zhang
JHJ. Holt
J. Holt
JCJ. Colvin
J. Colvin

1 June 2005 in Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
XZXu-Sheng Zhang
Xu-Sheng Zhang
WHWilliam G. Hill
William G. Hill
Quantitative traits show abundant genetic, environmental, and phenotypic variance, yet if they are subject to stabilizing selection for an optimal phenotype, both the genetic and environmental components are expected to decline. The mechanisms that determine the level and maintenance of phenotypic variance are not yet fully understood. While there has been extensive study of mechanisms maintaining genetic variability, it has generally been assumed that environmental variance is not dependent on the genotype and therefore not subject to change. However, accumulating data suggest that the environmental variance is under some degree of genetic control. In this study, it is assumed accordingly that both the genotypic value (i.e., mean phenotypic value) and the variance of phenotypic value given genotypic value depend on the genotype. Two models are investigated as potentially able to explain the protected maintenance of environmental variance of quantitative traits under stabilizing selection. One is varying environment among generations such that both the optimal phenotype and the strength of the stabilizing selection vary between generations. The other is the cost of homogeneity, which is based on an assumption of an engineering cost of minimizing variability in development. It is shown that a small homogeneity cost is enough to maintain the observed levels of environmental variance, whereas a large amount of temporal variation in the optimal phenotype and the strength of selection would be necessary.