Literature DB >> 24583582

Fisher's geometrical model emerges as a property of complex integrated phenotypic networks.

Guillaume Martin1.   

Abstract

Models relating phenotype space to fitness (phenotype-fitness landscapes) have seen important developments recently. They can roughly be divided into mechanistic models (e.g., metabolic networks) and more heuristic models like Fisher's geometrical model. Each has its own drawbacks, but both yield testable predictions on how the context (genomic background or environment) affects the distribution of mutation effects on fitness and thus adaptation. Both have received some empirical validation. This article aims at bridging the gap between these approaches. A derivation of the Fisher model "from first principles" is proposed, where the basic assumptions emerge from a more general model, inspired by mechanistic networks. I start from a general phenotypic network relating unspecified phenotypic traits and fitness. A limited set of qualitative assumptions is then imposed, mostly corresponding to known features of phenotypic networks: a large set of traits is pleiotropically affected by mutations and determines a much smaller set of traits under optimizing selection. Otherwise, the model remains fairly general regarding the phenotypic processes involved or the distribution of mutation effects affecting the network. A statistical treatment and a local approximation close to a fitness optimum yield a landscape that is effectively the isotropic Fisher model or its extension with a single dominant phenotypic direction. The fit of the resulting alternative distributions is illustrated in an empirical data set. These results bear implications on the validity of Fisher's model's assumptions and on which features of mutation fitness effects may vary (or not) across genomic or environmental contexts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fisher’s geometrical model; mutation fitness effects; network biology; random matrix theory; systems biology

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24583582      PMCID: PMC4012483          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.113.160325

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


  48 in total

Review 1.  Estimation of spontaneous genome-wide mutation rate parameters: whither beneficial mutations?

Authors:  T Bataillon
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  The population genetics of ecological specialization in evolving Escherichia coli populations.

Authors:  V S Cooper; R E Lenski
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-10-12       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Adaptation and the cost of complexity.

Authors:  H A Orr
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 4.  Experimental tests of the adaptive significance of sexual recombination.

Authors:  William R Rice
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 53.242

5.  Escherichia coli K-12 undergoes adaptive evolution to achieve in silico predicted optimal growth.

Authors:  Rafael U Ibarra; Jeremy S Edwards; Bernhard O Palsson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-11-14       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 6.  Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation.

Authors:  Santiago F Elena; Richard E Lenski
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 7.  Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization.

Authors:  Albert-László Barabási; Zoltán N Oltvai
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 53.242

8.  The anomalous effects of biased mutation.

Authors:  D Waxman; J R Peck
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  Estimating coarse gene network structure from large-scale gene perturbation data.

Authors:  Andreas Wagner
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  Compensating for our load of mutations: freezing the meltdown of small populations.

Authors:  A Poon; S P Otto
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.694

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  Effective models and the search for quantitative principles in microbial evolution.

Authors:  Benjamin H Good; Oskar Hallatschek
Journal:  Curr Opin Microbiol       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 7.934

2.  The distribution of epistasis on simple fitness landscapes.

Authors:  Christelle Fraïsse; John J Welch
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 3.703

3.  Genotypic Complexity of Fisher's Geometric Model.

Authors:  Sungmin Hwang; Su-Chan Park; Joachim Krug
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  The Nonstationary Dynamics of Fitness Distributions: Asexual Model with Epistasis and Standing Variation.

Authors:  Guillaume Martin; Lionel Roques
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Balancing selection in species with separate sexes: insights from Fisher's geometric model.

Authors:  Tim Connallon; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 6.  Multi-locus interactions and the build-up of reproductive isolation.

Authors:  I Satokangas; S H Martin; H Helanterä; J Saramäki; J Kulmuni
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Genetic Paths to Evolutionary Rescue and the Distribution of Fitness Effects Along Them.

Authors:  Matthew M Osmond; Sarah P Otto; Guillaume Martin
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  The distribution of fitness effects in an uncertain world.

Authors:  Tim Connallon; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.694

9.  Evolutionary Rescue over a Fitness Landscape.

Authors:  Yoann Anciaux; Luis-Miguel Chevin; Ophélie Ronce; Guillaume Martin
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  How does epistasis influence the response to selection?

Authors:  N H Barton
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 3.821

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.