| Literature DB >> 23665876 |
David W Hall1, Sara Fox, Jennie J Kuzdzal-Fick, Joan E Strassmann, David C Queller.
Abstract
We performed a mutation accumulation (MA) experiment in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum to estimate the rate and distribution of effects of spontaneous mutations affecting eight putative fitness traits. We found that the per-generation mutation rate for most fitness components is 0.0019 mutations per haploid genome per generation or larger. This rate is an order of magnitude higher than estimates for fitness components in the unicellular eukaryote Saccharomyces cerevisiae, even though the base-pair substitution rate is two orders of magnitude lower. The high rate of fitness-altering mutations observed in this species may be partially explained by a large mutational target relative to S. cerevisiae. Fitness-altering mutations also may occur primarily at simple sequence repeats, which are common throughout the genome, including in coding regions, and may represent a target that is particularly likely to give fitness effects upon mutation. The majority of mutations had deleterious effects on fitness, but there was evidence for a substantial fraction, up to 40%, being beneficial for some of the putative fitness traits. Competitive ability within the multicellular slug appears to be under weak directional selection, perhaps reflecting the fact that slugs are sometimes, but not often, comprised of multiple clones in nature. Evidence for pleiotropy among fitness components across MA lines was absent, suggesting that mutations tend to act on single fitness components.Entities:
Keywords: Dictyostelium; fitness components; mutation accumulation; mutation rate
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23665876 PMCID: PMC3704240 DOI: 10.1534/g3.113.005934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Some MA estimates of haploid mutation rates per generation, U, and their average effects, E(a), for mutations that affect fitness
| Taxon | Fitness Component | E( | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viability | 0.35 | 0.027 | ||
| Viability | 0.47 | 0.023 | ||
| Viability | 0.14 | 0.03 | ||
| Viability | 0.02 | 0.1 | ||
| Viability | 0.052 | 0.11 | ||
| Viability | 0.29 | 0.02 | ||
| LRS | 0.05 | 0.23 | ||
| Fruit number | 0.06 | 0.06 | ||
| r | 0.0035 | 0.1 | ||
| 0.008 | 0.2 | |||
| 0.024 | 0.131 | |||
| 0.0033 | 0.182 | |||
| 0.0042 | 0.126 | |||
| Productivity | 0.018 | 0.369 | ||
| Survival | 0.003 | 0.390 | ||
| r | 0.037 | 0.051 | ||
| 0.013 | 0.099 | |||
| 0.0028 | 0.219 | |||
| 0.033 | 0.16 | |||
| MGR | 0.00006 | 0 0.061 | ||
| MGR | 0.00014 | 0 0.073 | ||
| SE | 0.00019 | 0.70 | ||
| 0.00013 | 0.79 | |||
| 0.00055 | 0.086 | |||
| 0.000048 | 0.217 | |||
| – | 0–0.049 | |||
| 0.00017 | 0.012 |
The effect of mutations is measured in homozygotes, except where noted. Table modified from Bataillon (2000). MA, mutation accumulation; LRS, lifetime reproductive success; r, growth rate; MGR, maximum growth rate; SE, sporulation efficiency.
Mean effect in heterozygotes.
Mean effect in haploids.
Data from a mutator line.
Comparison of means and variances of the ancestor, control, and MA line distributions
| Ancestor | Control (n = 10) | MA Lines (n = 90) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitness Component | Mean | Var | Mean | Var | Mean | Var |
| Plate growth | 1.000 ( | 0.0015 | 0.991NS | 0.0011NS | 1.000NS/NS | 0.0025NS/NS |
| Liquid growth | 1.000 ( | 0.0011 | 0.922NS | 0.0275* | 0.705***/** | 0.0471***/* |
| Slug distance | 1.000 ( | 0.0017 | 0.867*** | 0.0030NS | 0.889***/NS | 0.0245***/* |
| Total FBs | 1.000 ( | 0.0014 | 0.902** | 0.0016NS | 0.969 NS/* | 0.0112**/** |
| Spores per FB | 1.000 ( | 0.0017 | 1.033NS | 0.0090NS | 0.919*/* | 0.0290***/* |
| Total spores | 1.000 ( | 0.0010 | 0.930** | 0.0021NS | 0.869***/* | 0.0080**/NS |
| Spore germination | 1.000 ( | 0.0000 | 0.987** | 0.0003** | 0.519***/*** | 0.0715***/*** |
| Competitive ability | 0.999 ( | 0.0007 | 1.000NS | 0.0004NS | 0.900**/** | 0.1247***/*** |
Significance of control vs. ancestor is given in the superscript of the fourth (mean) and fifth (variance) columns. Significance of MA line vs. ancestor (left side of slash) and MA line vs. control (right side of slash) are given in superscript of the sixth (mean) and seventh (variance) columns. Significance levels for means are from Wilcoxon nonparametric tests of equality of means, after we corrected for multiple comparisons (Benjamini and Hochberg 2000). Significance levels for variances are from nonparametric Levene tests of equality of variances, after correcting for multiple comparisons. MA, mutation accumulation; Var, variance; FB, fruiting body; NS, not significant. NS P > 0.05, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.
Figure 1Boxplots of relative fitness distributions for the ancestor, control lines and MA lines for the eight fitness components. Box indicates first and third quartile, horizontal line indicates median. Whiskers extend from the minimum and maximum points lying within 1.5 times the interquartile range below the first and above the third quartiles. Points outside of this range are shown as open circles.
95% CI bounds assuming normality and corrected for multiple tests, for each fitness component, and the number of lines (of 90) that are significantly below (low) or above (high) the CI
| Fitness Component | Lower CI Bound | Upper CI Bound | Low Lines | High Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plate growth | 0.867 | 1.133 | 2 | 0 |
| Liquid growth | 0.886 | 1.114 | 67 | 1 |
| Slug distance | 0.858 | 1.142 | 42 | 6 |
| Total FBs | 0.871 | 1.129 | 14 | 3 |
| Spores per FB | 0.858 | 1.142 | 35 | 8 |
| Total spores | 0.968 | 1.032 | 76 | 1 |
| Spore germination | 0.993 | 1.007 | 85 | 0 |
| Competitive ability | 0.911 | 1.089 | 44 | 17 |
CI, confidence interval; FB, fruiting body.
Pairwise Spearman correlations among fitness components
| Liquid Growth | Slug Distance | Total FB | Spores per FB | Total Spores | Spore Germination | Competitive Ability | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plate growth | −0.03 | −0.13 | 0.22 | −0.08 | 0.06 | −0.07 | 0.00 |
| Liquid growth | −0.06 | −0.11 | −0.04 | −0.16 | 0.04 | −0.09 | |
| Slug distance | 0.17 | − | −0.26 | 0.11 | −0.04 | ||
| Total FB | −0.25 | −0.02 | −0.05 | ||||
| Spores per FB | −0.15 | 0.02 | |||||
| Total spores | −0.23 | −0.08 | |||||
| Spore germination | 0.08 |
Significant correlations at P = 0.05 level after we corrected for multiple comparisons (Benjamini and Hochberg 2000) are shown in bold. FB, fruiting body.
The observed and expected number of MA lines exhibiting 0–8 fitness values that are significantly different from the ancestor distributions
| Affected Components | Observed MA Lines | Expected from Simulation |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0.01 |
| 1 | 1 | 0.31 |
| 2 | 4 | 3.23 |
| 3 | 13 | 13.59 |
| 4 | 24 | 28.33 |
| 5 | 34 | 29.12 |
| 6 | 11 | 13.38 |
| 7 | 3 | 2.00 |
| 8 | 0 | 0.04 |
The expected values are derived by simulation as described in the text. There is no significant difference between the two distributions (χ2 = 4.26, df = 8, P = 0.83). MA, mutation accumulation.
ML (columns 2-4) and BM (columns 5 and 6) estimates of mutation parameters for each fitness component
| Component | P (ML) | E( | U (ML) | E( | U (BM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plate growth | 0.3 (0.03–0.70) | 0.112 | 0.0001 (0.00003–0.0007) | ||
| Liquid growth | 0.15 (0.03–0.46) | 0.11 (0–0.135) | 0.0039 (0.0024–∞) | 0.156 | 0.0019 |
| Slug distance | 0.3 (0.15–0.42) | 0 (0–0.11) | ∞ (0.0050–∞) | 0.206 | 0.0005 |
| Total FBs | 0.4 (0.25–0.48) | 0.055 (0–0.086) | 0.0027 (0.0012–∞) | 0.311 | 0.0002 |
| Spores per FB | 0.4 (0.25–0.42) | 0 (0–0.12) | ∞ (0.0019–∞) | 0.338 | 0.0002 |
| Total spores | 0 (0–0.38) | 0.052 | 0.0026 (0.0014–∞) | 0.053 | 0.0025 |
| Spore germination | 0.148 | 0.0033 | |||
| Competitive ability | 0.3 (0.22–0.46) | 0.23 (0.08–0.26) | 0.0015 (0.0014–0.0031) |
For ML estimates, the 2 log unit support intervals are shown in parentheses. BM estimates are only calculated for the six components in which the difference in the mean between the MA lines and ancestor distributions was greater than the difference in the variance. Effect can be positive or negative for ML estimate, and is negative (deleterious) for BM estimates. ML, maximum likelihood; BM, Bateman-Mukai; P, proportion beneficial; E(a), average fitness effect of a substitution; U, haploid genome-wide mutation rate per cell generation; MA, mutation accumulation.
Equal effects gives highest likelihood.
BM is not applicable.
Data are poor fit to assumptions of likelihood.