Literature DB >> 23720539

Genomic mutation rates that neutralize adaptive evolution and natural selection.

Philip J Gerrish1, Alexandre Colato, Paul D Sniegowski.   

Abstract

When mutation rates are low, natural selection remains effective, and increasing the mutation rate can give rise to an increase in adaptation rate. When mutation rates are high to begin with, however, increasing the mutation rate may have a detrimental effect because of the overwhelming presence of deleterious mutations. Indeed, if mutation rates are high enough: (i) adaptive evolution may be neutralized, resulting in a zero (or negative) adaptation rate despite the continued availability of adaptive and/or compensatory mutations, or (ii) natural selection may be neutralized, because the fitness of lineages bearing adaptive and/or compensatory mutations--whether established or newly arising--is eroded by excessive mutation, causing such lineages to decline in frequency. We apply these two criteria to a standard model of asexual adaptive evolution and derive mathematical expressions--some new, some old in new guise--delineating the mutation rates under which either adaptive evolution or natural selection is neutralized. The expressions are simple and require no a priori knowledge of organism- and/or environment-specific parameters. Our discussion connects these results to each other and to previous theory, showing convergence or equivalence of the different results in most cases.

Keywords:  Fisher's fundamental theorem; beneficial mutations; error threshold; mutagenesis; population genetics

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23720539      PMCID: PMC4043167          DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2013.0329

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Interface        ISSN: 1742-5662            Impact factor:   4.118


  67 in total

1.  Error catastrophe and antiviral strategy.

Authors:  Manfred Eigen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-10-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Adaptive evolution of asexual populations under Muller's ratchet.

Authors:  Doris Bachtrog; Isabel Gordo
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 3.  Mutational fitness effects in RNA and single-stranded DNA viruses: common patterns revealed by site-directed mutagenesis studies.

Authors:  Rafael Sanjuán
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-06-27       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  The error threshold.

Authors:  Christof K Biebricher; Manfred Eigen
Journal:  Virus Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.303

5.  Replication mode and landscape topology differentially affect RNA virus mutational load and robustness.

Authors:  Josep Sardanyés; Ricard V Solé; Santiago F Elena
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2009-09-23       Impact factor: 5.103

6.  Rates of spontaneous mutation among RNA viruses.

Authors:  J W Drake
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1993-05-01       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor. 1. The advantage of recombination.

Authors:  A S Kondrashov
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 1.588

8.  The accumulation of deleterious genes in a population--Muller's Ratchet.

Authors:  J Haigh
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1978-10       Impact factor: 1.570

9.  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

10.  Understanding the evolutionary fate of finite populations: the dynamics of mutational effects.

Authors:  Olin K Silander; Olivier Tenaillon; Lin Chao
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  12 in total

1.  Dynamics and Fate of Beneficial Mutations Under Lineage Contamination by Linked Deleterious Mutations.

Authors:  Sophie Pénisson; Tanya Singh; Paul Sniegowski; Philip Gerrish
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 2.  Genetic drift, selection and the evolution of the mutation rate.

Authors:  Michael Lynch; Matthew S Ackerman; Jean-Francois Gout; Hongan Long; Way Sung; W Kelley Thomas; Patricia L Foster
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  A comparative study on karyotypic diversification rate in mammals.

Authors:  P A Martinez; U P Jacobina; R V Fernandes; C Brito; C Penone; T F Amado; C R Fonseca; C J Bidau
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 3.821

Review 4.  Arresting Evolution.

Authors:  James J Bull; Jeffrey E Barrick
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 11.639

5.  RNA Recombination Enhances Adaptability and Is Required for Virus Spread and Virulence.

Authors:  Yinghong Xiao; Igor M Rouzine; Simone Bianco; Ashley Acevedo; Elizabeth Faul Goldstein; Mikhail Farkov; Leonid Brodsky; Raul Andino
Journal:  Cell Host Microbe       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 21.023

6.  Empirical complexities in the genetic foundations of lethal mutagenesis.

Authors:  James J Bull; Paul Joyce; Eric Gladstone; Ian J Molineux
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 7.  Evolution with a seed bank: The population genetic consequences of microbial dormancy.

Authors:  William R Shoemaker; Jay T Lennon
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2018-01-02       Impact factor: 5.183

8.  High mutation rates limit evolutionary adaptation in Escherichia coli.

Authors:  Kathleen Sprouffske; José Aguilar-Rodríguez; Paul Sniegowski; Andreas Wagner
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Two sides of the same coin: A population genetics perspective on lethal mutagenesis and mutational meltdown.

Authors:  Sebastian Matuszewski; Louise Ormond; Claudia Bank; Jeffrey D Jensen
Journal:  Virus Evol       Date:  2017-03-02

10.  Mutation and Selection in Bacteria: Modelling and Calibration.

Authors:  C D Bayliss; C Fallaize; R Howitt; M V Tretyakov
Journal:  Bull Math Biol       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 1.758

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.