Literature DB >> 15446419

Evolution and stability of the G-matrix on a landscape with a moving optimum.

Adam G Jones1, Stevan J Arnold, Reinhard Bürger.   

Abstract

In quantitative genetics, the genetic architecture of traits, described in terms of variances and covariances, plays a major role in determining the trajectory of evolutionary change. Hence, the genetic variance-covariance matrix (G-matrix) is a critical component of modern quantitative genetics theory. Considerable debate has surrounded the issue of G-matrix constancy because unstable G-matrices provide major difficulties for evolutionary inference. Empirical studies and analytical theory have not resolved the debate. Here we present the results of stochastic models of G-matrix evolution in a population responding to an adaptive landscape with an optimum that moves at a constant rate. This study builds on the previous results of stochastic simulations of G-matrix stability under stabilizing selection arising from a stationary optimum. The addition of a moving optimum leads to several important new insights. First, evolution along genetic lines of least resistance increases stability of the orientation of the G-matrix relative to stabilizing selection alone. Evolution across genetic lines of least resistance decreases G-matrix stability. Second, evolution in response to a continuously changing optimum can produce persistent maladaptation for a correlated trait, even if its optimum does not change. Third, the retrospective analysis of selection performs very well when the mean G-matrix (G) is known with certainty, indicating that covariance between G and the directional selection gradient beta is usually small enough in magnitude that it introduces only a small bias in estimates of the net selection gradient. Our results also show, however, that the contemporary G-matrix only serves as a rough guide to G. The most promising approach for the estimation of G is probably through comparative phylogenetic analysis. Overall, our results show that directional selection actually can increase stability of the G-matrix and that retrospective analysis of selection is inherently feasible. One major remaining challenge is to gain a sufficient understanding of the G-matrix to allow the confident estimation of G.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15446419     DOI: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb00450.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  39 in total

1.  Coevolution in multidimensional trait space favours escape from parasites and pathogens.

Authors:  R Tucker Gilman; Scott L Nuismer; Dwueng-Chwuan Jhwueng
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-03-04       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Evolution of adaptive phenotypic variation patterns by direct selection for evolvability.

Authors:  Mihaela Pavlicev; James M Cheverud; Günter P Wagner
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  MIPoD: a hypothesis-testing framework for microevolutionary inference from patterns of divergence.

Authors:  Paul A Hohenlohe; Stevan J Arnold
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.926

4.  Characterizing the evolution of genetic variance using genetic covariance tensors.

Authors:  Emma Hine; Stephen F Chenoweth; Howard D Rundle; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-06-12       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Patterns of quantitative genetic variation in multiple dimensions.

Authors:  Mark Kirkpatrick
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2008-08-10       Impact factor: 1.082

6.  The evolution of genetic architectures underlying quantitative traits.

Authors:  Etienne Rajon; Joshua B Plotkin
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 7.  Mate choice and sexual selection: what have we learned since Darwin?

Authors:  Adam G Jones; Nicholas L Ratterman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  The genetic basis of phenotypic adaptation II: the distribution of adaptive substitutions in the moving optimum model.

Authors:  Michael Kopp; Joachim Hermisson
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  The beak of the other finch: coevolution of genetic covariance structure and developmental modularity during adaptive evolution.

Authors:  Alexander V Badyaev
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-04-12       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Genetic regulatory network motifs constrain adaptation through curvature in the landscape of mutational (co)variance.

Authors:  Tyler D Hether; Paul A Hohenlohe
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 3.694

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.