| Literature DB >> 24826801 |
Andrew D Morgan1, Rob W Ness, Peter D Keightley, Nick Colegrave.
Abstract
Estimates of mutational parameters, such as the average fitness effect of a new mutation and the rate at which new genetic variation for fitness is created by mutation, are important for the understanding of many biological processes. However, the causes of interspecific variation in mutational parameters and the extent to which they vary within species remain largely unknown. We maintained multiple strains of the unicellular eukaryote Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, for approximately 1000 generations under relaxed selection by transferring a single cell every ~10 generations. Mean fitness of the lines tended to decline with generations of mutation accumulation whereas mutational variance increased. We did not find any evidence for differences among strains in any of the mutational parameters estimated. The overall change in mean fitness per cell division and rate of input of mutational variance per cell division were more similar to values observed in multicellular organisms than to those in other single-celled microbes. However, after taking into account differences in genome size among species, estimates from multicellular organisms and microbes, including our new estimates from C. reinhardtii, become substantially more similar. Thus, we suggest that variation in genome size is an important determinant of interspecific variation in mutational parameters.Entities:
Keywords: Genomic deleterious mutation rate; mutation accumulation; mutational effect; spontaneous mutation
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24826801 PMCID: PMC4277324 DOI: 10.1111/evo.12448
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evolution ISSN: 0014-3820 Impact factor: 3.694
Strains used in the MA experiment
| Strain | Isolated (location/year) | Mating type |
|---|---|---|
| CC-1373 | South Deerfield, MA, USA/1945 | + |
| CC-1952 | MN, USA/1986 | − |
| CC-2342 | PA, USA/1989 | − |
| CC-2344 | PA, USA/1989 | + |
| CC-2931 | Durham, NC, USA/1991 | − |
| CC-2937 | QC, Canada/1993 | + |
Estimates of numbers of generations undergone by each strain between transfers and over the entire MA experiment
| Strain | Number of generations by ancestor in three days | Number of generations by ancestor in four days | Number of generations by ancestor in five days | Average number of generations by MA lines in four days (95% CIs) | Average number of generations by MA lines in five days (95% CIs) | Total number of generations of MA (95% CIs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC-1952 | 8.68 | 12.39 | 14.34 | 11.49 (11.00, 11.98) | 13.12 (12.63, 13.60) | 1021.12 (969.37, 1072.88) |
| CC-2342 | 10.90 | 12.72 | 13.46 | 11.43 (10.55, 12.31) | 13.54 (12.76, 14.31) | 1032.65 (942.31, 1122.98) |
| CC-2344 | 7.54 | 11.39 | 12.64 | 10.67 (10.11, 11.23) | 12.22 (11.73, 12.71) | 938.10 (912.50, 963.69) |
| CC-2931 | 9.50 | 12.06 | 13.48 | 11.08 (10.36, 11.79) | 12.75 (11.87, 13.63) | 1025.59 (985.90, 1065.28) |
| CC-2937 | 8.17 | 12.15 | 13.94 | 11.24 (10.77, 11.70) | 13.08 (12.67, 13.48) | 929.07 (854.31, 1003.83) |
Estimates are shown for three-, four-, and five-day transfer periods for the ancestors. The three-day transfer period was only used in the early part of the study, and so three days measures were not made on the MA lines.
Estimates of mutational variance for fitness assays
| Δ | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variance | Δ | generation | generation) | generation) | ||||||||||
| Strain | First Anc | First MA | Second Anc | Second MA | First | Second | First | Second | First | Second | First | Second | First | Second |
| CC-1952 | 0 (0,0) | 6.93×10−4 (3.56×10−4, 1.89×10−3) | 6.99×10−5 (3.19×10−5, 2.57×10−4) | 5.99×10−4 (3.15×10−4, 1.55×10−3) | NA* | 8.57* | 6.93×10−4 | 5.29×10−4 | 6.79×10−7 | 5.18×10−7 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.82 | 0.66 |
| CC-2342 | 2.86×10−17 (1.30×10−17, 1.05×10−16) | 1.47×10−3 (6.42×10−4, 6.08×10−3) | 2.43×10−4 (1.11×10−4, 8.90×10−4) | 9.82×10−4 (5.16×10−4, 2.55×10−3) | 5.14×1013* | 4.04* | 1.47×10−3 | 7.39×10−4 | 1.42×10−6 | 7.16×10−7 | 0.78 | 0.65 | 1.06 | 0.85 |
| CC-2344 | 0 (0,0) | 6.3×10−4 (3.31×10−4, 1.64×10−3) | 0 (0,0) | 1.09×10−4 (5.75×10−5, 2.84×10−4) | NA* | NA* | 6.30×10−4 | 1.09×10−4 | 6.72×10−7 | 1.16×10−7 | 0.77 | 0.30 | 0.89 | 0.32 |
| CC-2931 | 5.24×10−17 (2.39×10−17, 1.93×10−16) | 1.061×10−4 (5.46×10−5, 2.89×10−4) | 1.99×10−4 (9.07×10−5, 7.30×10−4) | 7.76×10−4 (4.16×10−4, 1.93×10−3) | 2.02×1012* | 3.9* | 1.06×10−4 | 5.77×10−4 | 1.03×10−7 | 5.63×10−7 | 0.19 | 0.58 | 0.25 | 0.71 |
| CC-2937 | − | − | 7.15×10−21 (3.26×10−21, 2.62×10−20) | 2.91×10−4 (1.56×10−4, 7.24×10−4) | − | 4.07×1016* | − | 2.91×10−4 | − | 3.13×10−7 | − | 0.51 | − | 0.54 |
Columns show estimates from the first and second replicate assays. Anc = ancestor; MA = mutation accumulation lines.
1Among MA line variance component.
2Ancestral among-pseudoline variance component divided by the between line MA variance component; the critical value = 3.006 with df = 15,9 (*significant difference at the 5% level between MA and ancestral variance).
3Change in the among-line variance component of fitness between the MA lines and their ancestors.
4Mutational heritability calculated as ΔV /number of generations.
5Coefficients of mutational variance calculated as the square root of ΔV per generation divided by the mean fitness of the ancestral lines.
6Coefficients of mutational variance calculated as the square root of ΔV per generation divided by the mean fitness of the MA lines.
Figure 1zAmong-line variance in fitness for each strain in the first (A) and second (B) fitness assays. Black circles are the among-line variance component for the ancestral pseudolines for each strain, and white circles are the among-line variance component for the MA lines for each strain. Bars are 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 2Estimates of fitness plotted against number of generations of mutation accumulation for all strains in the first (A) and second (B) fitness assays. The lines represent the linear regressions of fitness on the number of generations of mutation accumulation, with the ancestral pseudolines at 0 generations.
Figure 3Correlation between the two measures of fitness: number of generations on agar plates and maximal specific growth rate (μmax) in liquid. (A) Number of generations in four days on agar plates versus μmax, (B) number of generations in five days on agar plates versus μmax.
Estimates of fitness and mutational parameters from the fitness assays
| Fitness (95% CI) | Δ | E( | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strain | First Anc | First MA | Second Anc | Second MA | First | Second | First | Second | First | Second |
| CC-1952 | 0.153 (0.127, 0.178) | 0.100 (0.079, 0.121) | 0.130 (0.102, 0.158) | 0.108 (0.071, 0.145) | −0.051 (−0.071, −0.030) | −0.019 (−0.037, −0.001) | 3.80×10−3 (5.84×10−3) | 6.84×10−4 (1.03×10−3) | −1.34×10−2 (1.30×10−2) | −2.75×10−2 (2.67×10−2) |
| CC-2342 | 0.153 (0.138, 0.168) | 0.112 (0.061, 0.163) | 0.130 (0.112, 0.148) | 0.099 (0.078, 0.120) | −0.042 (−0.067, −0.017) | −0.017 (−0.035, +0.001) | 1.24×10−3 (1.87×10−3) | 3.92×10−4 (5.93×10−4) | −3.38×10−2 (3.28×10−2) | −4.27×10−2 (4.14×10−2) |
| CC-2344 | 0.107 (0.089, 0.125) | 0.092 (0.062, 0.121) | 0.114 (0.100, 0.128) | 0.105 (0.086, 0.124) | −0.016 (−0.036, +0.005) | −0.011 (−0.031, +0.008) | 3.68×10−4 (5.56×10−4) | 1.13×10−3 (1.71×10−3) | −4.27×10−2 (4.12×10−2) | −1.02×10−2 (9.89×10−3) |
| CC-2931 | 0.166 (0.145, 0.187) | 0.129 (0.110, 0.148) | 0.130 (0.111, 0.149) | 0.106 (0.088, 0.124) | −0.036 (−0.056, −0.015) | −0.017 (−0.034 +0.001) | 1.22×10−2 (1.84×10−2) | 4.89×10−4 (7.39×10−4) | −2.91×10−3 (2.82×10−3) | −3.39×10−2 (3.29×10 −2) |
| CC-2937 | − | − | 0.109 (0.098, 0.121) | 0.104 (0.090, 0.118) | − | −0.003 (−0.022, +0.016) | − | 3.13×10−5 (4.73×10−5) | − | −1.00×10−1 (9.70×10−2) |
Separate columns show estimates from the first and second replicate assays.
1Change in mean fitness per generation between the ancestral pseudolines (Anc) and MA lines (MA) for each strain.
2Bateman–Mukai estimates of the genomic deleterious mutation rate per generation.
3Bateman–Mukai estimates of the mean mutational effect per generation.
Mutational and genomic properties of model organisms used for MA experiments
| μ (/bp* | Genome | Proteome size | Coding | Cell div. | Mut./div.* | Mut./div.* | Δ | Δ | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organism | gen.) | size (bp) | (codons) | positions | Ploidy | /gen. | genome | proteome | Δ | Δ | mut. | mut. | E( | ||
| 6.50×10−9 | 1.57×108 | 1.34×107 | 2.01×107 | 2 | 35 | 0.0292 | 0.0037 | 4.15 | −5.45×10−3 | −1.56×10−4 | −5.34×10−3 | −4.17×10−2 | 0.027 | −0.39 | |
| 5.75×10−9 | 9.70×107 | 1.00×107 | 1.51×107 | 2 | 9 | 0.062 | 0.0096 | 1.49 | −1.07×10−3 | −1.18×10−4 | −1.91×10−3 | −1.23×10−2 | 0.007 | −0.25 | |
| 4.65×10−9 | 1.40×108 | 7.10×106 | 1.06×107 | 2 | 36 | 0.018 | 0.0014 | 1.54 | −4.87×10−3 | −1.35×10−4 | −7.15×10−3 | −9.84×10−2 | 0.1 | −0.14 | |
| 2.08×10−10 | 1.12×108 | 1.31×107 | 1.96×107 | 1 | 1 | 0.0233 | 0.0041 | 0.54 | −2.44×10−5 | −2.44×10−5 | −1.05×10−3 | −5.97×10−3 | 0.002 | −0.04 | |
| 3.30×10−10 | 1.25×107 | 2.91×106 | 4.36×106 | 1 | 1 | 0.0041 | 0.0014 | 0.09 | −5.45×10−6 | −5.45×10−6 | −1.32×10−3 | −3.79×10−3 | 2.4×10−5 | −0.13 | |
| 2.60×10−10 | 4.64×106 | 1.32×106 | 1.97×108 | 1 | 1 | 0.0012 | 0.0005 | 0.02 | −2.50×10−6 | −2.50×10−6 | −2.07×10−3 | −4.88×10−3 | 1.7×10−4 | −0.01 |
The organisms listed are those for which genomic and phenotypic outcomes of MA are available. The figures reported are the mean value for each species as summarized in Halligan and Keightley (2009 and references therein). Using available estimates of the mutation rate (μ), genome size, and proteome size, we calculate the change in fitness per mutation.
gen. = generations; div. = divisions.
1Proteome sizes were taken from Massey (2008) and references therein.
2The number of coding positions was estimated as two-thirds of CDS to account for synonymous changes.
3Cell divisions per generation were taken from Lynch (2010) and references therein.
4MA results were taken from Table1 of Halligan and Keightley (2009), which tabulated standardized parameter estimates from MA studies.
5Mean values for D. melanogaster exclude the extreme outlier values of Gong et al. (2005) (see Halligan and Keightley 2009 for details).