Literature DB >> 14668375

Recombination, dominance and selection on amino acid polymorphism in the Drosophila genome: contrasting patterns on the X and fourth chromosomes.

Lea A Sheldahl1, Daniel M Weinreich, David M Rand.   

Abstract

Surveys of nucleotide polymorphism and divergence indicate that the average selection coefficient on Drosophila proteins is weakly positive. Similar surveys in mitochondrial genomes and in the selfing plant Arabidopsis show that weak negative selection has operated. These differences have been attributed to the low recombination environment of mtDNA and Arabidopsis that has hindered adaptive evolution through the interference effects of linkage. We test this hypothesis with new sequence surveys of proteins lying in low recombination regions of the Drosophila genome. We surveyed >3800 bp across four proteins at the tip of the X chromosome and >3600 bp across four proteins on the fourth chromosome in 24 strains of D. melanogaster and 5 strains of D. simulans. This design seeks to study the interaction of selection and linkage by comparing silent and replacement variation in semihaploid (X chromosome) and diploid (fourth chromosome) environments lying in regions of low recombination. While the data do indicate very low rates of exchange, all four gametic phases were observed both at the tip of the X and across the fourth chromosome. Silent variation is very low at the tip of the X (thetaS = 0.0015) and on the fourth chromosome (thetaS = 0.0002), but the tip of the X shows a greater proportional loss of variation than the fourth shows relative to normal-recombination regions. In contrast, replacement polymorphism at the tip of the X is not reduced (thetaR = 0.00065, very close to the X chromosome average). MK and HKA tests both indicate a significant excess of amino acid polymorphism at the tip of the X relative to the fourth. Selection is significantly negative at the tip of the X (Nes = -1.53) and nonsignificantly positive on the fourth (Nes approximately 2.9), analogous to the difference between mtDNA (or Arabidopsis) and the Drosophila genome average. Our distal X data are distinct from regions of normal recombination where the X shows a deficiency of amino acid polymorphism relative to the autosomes, suggesting more efficient selection against recessive deleterious replacement mutations. We suggest that the excess amino acid polymorphism on the distal X relative to the fourth chromosome is due to (1) differences in the mutation rate for selected mutations on the distal X or (2) a greater relaxation of selection from stronger linkage-related interference effects on the distal X. This relaxation of selection is presumed to be greater in magnitude than the difference in efficiency of selection between X-linked vs. autosomal selection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14668375      PMCID: PMC1462837     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  47 in total

1.  Molecular variation at the vermilion locus in geographically diverse populations of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

Authors:  D J Begun; C F Aquadro
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Molecular population genetics of the distal portion of the X chromosome in Drosophila: evidence for genetic hitchhiking of the yellow-achaete region.

Authors:  D J Begun; C F Aquadro
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene.

Authors:  J M Smith; J Haigh
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1974-02       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  Comparative genomics of mitochondrial DNA in members of the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup.

Authors:  J W Ballard
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  Lack of polymorphism on the Drosophila fourth chromosome resulting from selection.

Authors:  A J Berry; J W Ajioka; M Kreitman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations.

Authors:  Y X Fu; W H Li
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Mitochondrial DNA evolution in the melanogaster species subgroup of Drosophila.

Authors:  M Solignac; M Monnerot; J C Mounolou
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.395

8.  Microsatellite variation and recombination rate in the human genome.

Authors:  B A Payseur; M W Nachman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  Testing the neutral theory of molecular evolution with genomic data from Drosophila.

Authors:  Justin C Fay; Gerald J Wyckoff; Chung-I Wu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-02-28       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Inferring weak selection from patterns of polymorphism and divergence at "silent" sites in Drosophila DNA.

Authors:  H Akashi
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.562

View more
  18 in total

1.  A pseudohitchhiking model of X vs. autosomal diversity.

Authors:  Andrea J Betancourt; Yuseob Kim; H Allen Orr
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  DNA sequence polymorphism and divergence at the erect wing and suppressor of sable loci of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

Authors:  John M Braverman; Brian P Lazzaro; Montserrat Aguadé; Charles H Langley
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-06-08       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Evolution of a distinct genomic domain in Drosophila: comparative analysis of the dot chromosome in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis.

Authors:  Wilson Leung; Christopher D Shaffer; Taylor Cordonnier; Jeannette Wong; Michelle S Itano; Elizabeth E Slawson Tempel; Elmer Kellmann; David Michael Desruisseau; Carolyn Cain; Robert Carrasquillo; Tien M Chusak; Katazyna Falkowska; Kelli D Grim; Rui Guan; Jacquelyn Honeybourne; Sana Khan; Louis Lo; Rebecca McGaha; Jevon Plunkett; Justin M Richner; Ryan Richt; Leah Sabin; Anita Shah; Anushree Sharma; Sonal Singhal; Fine Song; Christopher Swope; Craig B Wilen; Jeremy Buhler; Elaine R Mardis; Sarah C R Elgin
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  The effects of recombination rate on the distribution and abundance of transposable elements.

Authors:  Elie S Dolgin; Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Background selection in single genes may explain patterns of codon bias.

Authors:  Laurence Loewe; Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2006-12-28       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 6.  The dot chromosome of Drosophila: insights into chromatin states and their change over evolutionary time.

Authors:  Nicole C Riddle; Sarah C R Elgin
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.239

7.  Population genomics: whole-genome analysis of polymorphism and divergence in Drosophila simulans.

Authors:  David J Begun; Alisha K Holloway; Kristian Stevens; Ladeana W Hillier; Yu-Ping Poh; Matthew W Hahn; Phillip M Nista; Corbin D Jones; Andrew D Kern; Colin N Dewey; Lior Pachter; Eugene Myers; Charles H Langley
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2007-11-06       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  Population genomic inferences from sparse high-throughput sequencing of two populations of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Timothy B Sackton; Rob J Kulathinal; Casey M Bergman; Aaron R Quinlan; Erik B Dopman; Mauricio Carneiro; Gabor T Marth; Daniel L Hartl; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 3.416

9.  Adaptive genic evolution in the Drosophila genomes.

Authors:  Joshua A Shapiro; Wei Huang; Chenhui Zhang; Melissa J Hubisz; Jian Lu; David A Turissini; Shu Fang; Hurng-Yi Wang; Richard R Hudson; Rasmus Nielsen; Zhu Chen; Chung-I Wu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  High DNA sequence diversity in pericentromeric genes of the plant Arabidopsis lyrata.

Authors:  Akira Kawabe; Alan Forrest; Stephen I Wright; Deborah Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.