Literature DB >> 21878983

How closely does genetic diversity in finite populations conform to predictions of neutral theory? Large deficits in regions of low recombination.

R Frankham1.   

Abstract

Levels of genetic diversity in finite populations are crucial in conservation and evolutionary biology. Genetic diversity is required for populations to evolve and its loss is related to inbreeding in random mating populations, and thus to reduced population fitness and increased extinction risk. Neutral theory is widely used to predict levels of genetic diversity. I review levels of genetic diversity in finite populations in relation to predictions of neutral theory. Positive associations between genetic diversity and population size, as predicted by neutral theory, are observed for microsatellites, allozymes, quantitative genetic variation and usually for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). However, there are frequently significant deviations from neutral theory owing to indirect selection at linked loci caused by balancing selection, selective sweeps and background selection. Substantially lower genetic diversity than predicted under neutrality was found for chromosomes with low recombination rates and high linkage disequilibrium (compared with 'normally' recombining chromosomes within species and adjusted for different copy numbers and mutation rates), including W (median 100% lower) and Y (89% lower) chromosomes, dot fourth chromosomes in Drosophila (94% lower) and mtDNA (67% lower). Further, microsatellite genetic and allelic diversity were lost at 12 and 33% faster rates than expected in populations adapting to captivity, owing to widespread selective sweeps. Overall, neither neutral theory nor most versions of the genetic draft hypothesis are compatible with all empirical results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21878983      PMCID: PMC3282390          DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2011.66

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)        ISSN: 0018-067X            Impact factor:   3.821


  133 in total

1.  The neutralist, the fly and the selectionist.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Evolution. Size does not matter for mitochondrial DNA.

Authors:  Adam Eyre-Walker
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Population size does not influence mitochondrial genetic diversity in animals.

Authors:  Eric Bazin; Sylvain Glémin; Nicolas Galtier
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Y chromosome variation of mice and men.

Authors:  M W Nachman
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection.

Authors:  W G Hill; A Robertson
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1966-12       Impact factor: 1.588

6.  Nonrecombining genes in a recombination environment: the Drosophila "dot" chromosome.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Powell; Kirstin Dion; Montserrat Papaceit; Montserrat Aguadé; Saverio Vicario; Ryan C Garrick
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2010-10-12       Impact factor: 16.240

7.  Background selection and patterns of genetic diversity in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  B Charlesworth
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 1.588

8.  Effective population size and tests of neutrality at cytoplasmic genes in Arabidopsis.

Authors:  Stephen I Wright; Nardin Nano; John Paul Foxe; Vaqaar-Un Nisa Dar
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.588

9.  Limited number of patrilines in horse domestication.

Authors:  Gabriella Lindgren; Niclas Backström; June Swinburne; Linda Hellborg; Annika Einarsson; Kaj Sandberg; Gus Cothran; Carles Vilà; Matthew Binns; Hans Ellegren
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2004-03-14       Impact factor: 38.330

10.  Nucleotide diversity in the mitochondrial and nuclear compartments of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii: investigating the origins of genome architecture.

Authors:  David Roy Smith; Robert W Lee
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.260

View more
  24 in total

1.  Estimation of genetic variability level in inbred CF1 mouse lines selected for body weight.

Authors:  Mauricio Renny; Norma B Julio; Sandra F Bernardi; Cristina N Gardenal; María Inés Oyarzabal
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.166

Review 2.  Determinants of genetic diversity.

Authors:  Hans Ellegren; Nicolas Galtier
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 3.  Genomic signatures of selection at linked sites: unifying the disparity among species.

Authors:  Asher D Cutter; Bret A Payseur
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 53.242

4.  Molecular hyperdiversity and evolution in very large populations.

Authors:  Asher D Cutter; Richard Jovelin; Alivia Dey
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 6.185

5.  Microsatellite DNA analysis reveals lower than expected genetic diversity in the threatened leopard cat (Prionailurus bengalensis) in South Korea.

Authors:  Byung June Ko; Junghwa An; Hong Seomun; Mu-Yeong Lee; Soo Hyung Eo
Journal:  Genes Genomics       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 1.839

6.  Patterns of natural selection acting on the mitochondrial genome of a locally adapted fish species.

Authors:  Sofia Consuegra; Elgan John; Eric Verspoor; Carlos Garcia de Leaniz
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Rarity and genetic diversity in Indo-Pacific Acropora corals.

Authors:  Zoe T Richards; Madeleine J H Oppen
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  Recent demographic history and present fine-scale structure in the Northwest Atlantic leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) turtle population.

Authors:  Erica Molfetti; Sibelle Torres Vilaça; Jean-Yves Georges; Virginie Plot; Eric Delcroix; Rozen Le Scao; Anne Lavergne; Sébastien Barrioz; Fabrício Rodrigues dos Santos; Benoît de Thoisy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Time-series analysis reveals genetic responses to intensive management of razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus).

Authors:  Thomas E Dowling; Thomas F Turner; Evan W Carson; Melody J Saltzgiver; Deborah Adams; Brian Kesner; Paul C Marsh
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 5.183

10.  Nucleotide diversity of vernalization and flowering-time-related genes in a germplasm collection of meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis Huds. syn. Lolium pratense (Huds.) Darbysh.).

Authors:  Hiroshi Shinozuka; Melanie L Hand; Noel O I Cogan; German C Spangenberg; John W Forster
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 2.912

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.