Literature DB >> 26584901

Coalescence with Background and Balancing Selection in Systems with Bi- and Uniparental Reproduction: Contrasting Partial Asexuality and Selfing.

Aneil F Agrawal1, Matthew Hartfield2.   

Abstract

Uniparental reproduction in diploids, via asexual reproduction or selfing, reduces the independence with which separate loci are transmitted across generations. This is expected to increase the extent to which a neutral marker is affected by selection elsewhere in the genome. Such effects have previously been quantified in coalescent models involving selfing. Here we examine the effects of background selection and balancing selection in diploids capable of both sexual and asexual reproduction (i.e., partial asexuality). We find that the effect of background selection on reducing coalescent time (and effective population size) can be orders of magnitude greater when rates of sex are low than when sex is common. This is because asexuality enhances the effects of background selection through both a recombination effect and a segregation effect. We show that there are several reasons that the strength of background selection differs between systems with partial asexuality and those with comparable levels of uniparental reproduction via selfing. Expectations for reductions in Ne via background selection have been verified using stochastic simulations. In contrast to background selection, balancing selection increases the coalescence time for a linked neutral site. With partial asexuality, the effect of balancing selection is somewhat dependent upon the mode of selection (e.g., heterozygote advantage vs. negative frequency-dependent selection) in a manner that does not apply to selfing. This is because the frequency of heterozygotes, which are required for recombination onto alternative genetic backgrounds, is more dependent on the pattern of selection with partial asexuality than with selfing.
Copyright © 2016 by the Genetics Society of America.

Keywords:  asexual reproduction; background selection; balancing selection; coalescence; effective population size; self-fertilization

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26584901      PMCID: PMC4701095          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.115.181024

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


  41 in total

1.  The coalescent with gene conversion.

Authors:  C Wiuf; J Hein
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Genetic variation in organisms with sexual and asexual reproduction.

Authors:  B O Bengtsson
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.411

3.  Coalescence times and the Meselson effect in asexual eukaryotes.

Authors:  Alf Ceplitis
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  Soft sweeps: molecular population genetics of adaptation from standing genetic variation.

Authors:  Joachim Hermisson; Pleuni S Pennings
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-02-16       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Interference among deleterious mutations favours sex and recombination in finite populations.

Authors:  Peter D Keightley; Sarah P Otto
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Mitotic recombination counteracts the benefits of genetic segregation.

Authors:  Mohammad A Mandegar; Sarah P Otto
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 7.  Mutation rate variation in multicellular eukaryotes: causes and consequences.

Authors:  Charles F Baer; Michael M Miyamoto; Dee R Denver
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 53.242

8.  The effects of deleterious mutations on evolution in non-recombining genomes.

Authors:  Vera B Kaiser; Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2008-11-21       Impact factor: 11.639

9.  Background selection in single genes may explain patterns of codon bias.

Authors:  Laurence Loewe; Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2006-12-28       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  Balancing selection and low recombination affect diversity near the self-incompatibility loci of the plant Arabidopsis lyrata.

Authors:  Esther Kamau; Deborah Charlesworth
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 10.834

View more
  7 in total

1.  Charlesworth et al. on Background Selection and Neutral Diversity.

Authors:  Stephen I Wright
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  The Effect of Strong Purifying Selection on Genetic Diversity.

Authors:  Ivana Cvijović; Benjamin H Good; Michael M Desai
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Background Selection in Partially Selfing Populations.

Authors:  Denis Roze
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Mutation Rate Evolution in Partially Selfing and Partially Asexual Organisms.

Authors:  Camille Gervais; Denis Roze
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Contrasting gene-level signatures of selection with reproductive fitness.

Authors:  Stephen J Bush; Courtney J Murren; Araxi O Urrutia; Paula X Kover
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 6.622

6.  How Can We Resolve Lewontin's Paradox?

Authors:  Brian Charlesworth; Jeffrey D Jensen
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 4.065

7.  Detecting Long-Term Balancing Selection Using Allele Frequency Correlation.

Authors:  Katherine M Siewert; Benjamin F Voight
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 16.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.