| Literature DB >> 26329930 |
Shaun M Hug1, Brandon S Gaut2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the short-term, organisms acclimate to stress through phenotypic plasticity, but in the longer term they adapt to stress genetically. The mutations that accrue during adaptation may contribute to completely novel phenotypes, or they may instead act to restore the phenotype from a stressed to a pre-stress condition. To better understand the influence of evolution on the diversity and direction of phenotypic change, we used Biolog microarrays to assay 94 phenotypes of 115 Escherichia coli clones that had adapted to high temperature (42.2 °C). We also assayed these same phenotypes in the clones' ancestor under non-stress (37.0 °C) and stress (42.2 °C) conditions. We explored associations between Biolog phenotypes and genotypes, and we also investigated phenotypic differences between clones that have one of two adaptive genetic trajectories: one that is typified by mutations in the RNA polymerase β-subunit (rpoB) and another that is defined by mutations in the rho termination factor.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26329930 PMCID: PMC4557228 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-015-0457-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1Schematic of acclimation and the potential directional outcomes of adaptation. In addition to restored and unrestored states, which reflect the phenotype of the unstressed and stressed ancestor, respectively, evolved clones may exhibit partially restored, over-restored or reinforced phenotypes. Not shown are cases of novelty, in which evolved clones differ from ancestral treatments that do not differ
Categorizations of phenotypic magnitude and direction
| Category | Conditiona | Numberb |
|---|---|---|
| Partially Restored |
| 155 |
| Reinforced |
| 79 |
| Over-restored |
| 30 |
| Unrestored |
| 240 |
| Restored |
| 123 |
| Novel |
| 63 |
| Uninformative |
| 334 |
| Inconsistent | All Remaining Relationshipsc | 11 |
aThroughout the table, the symbol ‘≅’ reflects a comparison between two values that are similar enough that they do not differ statistically by t-test; however, ‘>’ and ‘<’ refer to significantly different values.
bOf 1035 total comparisons (115 clones × 9 principal components)
cMostly resulting from non-transitive pairwise significance
Fig. 2Plot of the first two principal components. The dots represent scores from the 115 evolved clones, each of which was replicated three times. The triangles represent the six replicates of the REL1206 ancestral strain at 42.2 °C; squares denote the ancestor at 37.0 °C. The arrows at the top of the plot illustrate directions of change relative to the two ancestral treatments (see Fig. 1 and Table 1)
Fig. 3Pie chart reporting estimates of the proportion of phenotypic variation attributable to directions of adaptation
Significant (q < 0.01) associations between genetic and phenotypic variation
| Principal component | Associated mutational objects (Number of affected clones)a |
|---|---|
| 1 | ECB_00503_large (35), ESCRE1901 (13), |
| 2 | ECB_00503_large (35), hokE_large (3), |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
aMutational objects are organized by p-value, in ascending order
Individual Biolog tests that contribute significantly to differences between clones that contain rpoB vs. rho mutations
| Biolog Test |
| Category |
|---|---|---|
| 4 % NaCl | 1.04E-25 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| Sodium Butyrate | 2.85E-22 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| Lincomycin | 1.61E-18 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| Tetrazolium Blue | 2.34E-14 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| Nalidixic Acid | 4.49E-10 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| p-Hydroxy-Phenylacetic Acid | 6.83E-10 | Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Fatty Acids |
| Gelatin | 1.53E-09 | Amino Acids |
| D-Sorbitol | 3.72E-08 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| D-Salicin | 9.24E-07 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| Beta-Hydroxy-D,L-Butyric Acid | 1.08E-06 | Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Fatty Acids |
| Aztreonam | 1.46E-06 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| L-Arginine | 1.57E-06 | Amino Acids |
| D-Malic Acid | 1.62E-06 | Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Fatty Acids |
| Quinic Acid | 1.90E-06 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| L-Histidine | 2.05E-06 | Amino Acids |
| Inosine | 3.17E-06 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| L-Pyroglutamic Acid | 5.92E-06 | Amino Acids |
| N-Acetyl-Neuraminic Acid | 6.21E-06 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| pH 5 | 7.78E-06 | Chemical Sensitivity |
| Tween 40 | 1.01E-05 | Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Fatty Acids |
| D-Raffinose | 2.70E-05 | Carbohydrates, Carbohydrate Derivatives |
| Bromo-Succinic Acid | 3.85E-05 | Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Fatty Acids |
Fig. 4Hierarchical clustering of evolved lines by phenotypes. Dendrograms are labeled with the presence (black) or absence (white) of each of mutation in the rho gene, the rpoB gene and the large deletion (ECB_00503_large)
Fig. 5Schematic of the four overlapping deletion events found during the thermal evolution experiments. a The largest deletion (ECB_00503_large) removes 64 genes and was found in 35 of 115 evolved clones. b The smaller deletion (ECB_00503_small) was found in 9 of 115 clones and removed 38 genes. c An even smaller variant was found in 1 of 115 clones and removed 18 genes. d The hokE_large mutation removed 24 genes and was found in 3 of 115 clones. All variants are described in Tenaillon et al. [5]. In all diagrams, numbers at the 5′ and 3′ end of the schematic represent the base position on the reference genome [35]