| Literature DB >> 27317782 |
Way Sung1, Matthew S Ackerman2, Marcus M Dillon3, Thomas G Platt4, Clay Fuqua2, Vaughn S Cooper5, Michael Lynch2.
Abstract
Mutations are the ultimate source of variation used for evolutionary adaptation, while also being predominantly deleterious and a source of genetic disorders. Understanding the rate of insertion-deletion mutations (indels) is essential to understanding evolutionary processes, especially in coding regions, where such mutations can disrupt production of essential proteins. Using direct estimates of indel rates from 14 phylogenetically diverse eukaryotic and bacterial species, along with measures of standing variation in such species, we obtain results that imply an inverse relationship of mutation rate and effective population size. These results, which corroborate earlier observations on the base-substitution mutation rate, appear most compatible with the hypothesis that natural selection reduces mutation rates per effective genome to the point at which the power of random genetic drift (approximated by the inverse of effective population size) becomes overwhelming. Given the substantial differences in DNA metabolism pathways that give rise to these two types of mutations, this consistency of results raises the possibility that refinement of other molecular and cellular traits may be inversely related to species-specific levels of random genetic drift.Entities:
Keywords: drift barrier; insertion-deletion mutation rate; mutation accumulation; mutation-rate evolution
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27317782 PMCID: PMC4978911 DOI: 10.1534/g3.116.030890
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Effective genome size (G), indel events per site per generation (u), base-substitution mutation rate per generation (u), θs (or πs, denoted by *) measurements for population mutation rate (Watterson 1975; Tajima 1989; Fu 1995), and estimated effective population size (N) for seven prokaryotic and eight eukaryotic organisms (see File S1 for details)
| Species | Label | θs or πs | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prokaryotes | |||||||
| 0.50 | 0.57 | 0.30 | 2.92 | 0.200* | 342.47 | ||
| 0.36 | 0.43 | 1.20 | 3.35 | 0.041 | 61.19 | ||
| 0.39 | 0.46 | 0.37 | 2.00 | 0.071 | 179.60 | ||
| 0.07 | 0.08 | 23.10 | 97.80 | 0.021 | 1.07 | ||
| 0.59 | 0.67 | 0.14 | 0.79 | 0.033* | 210.70 | ||
| 0.21 | 0.26 | 1.13 | 7.40 | 0.052 | 35.14 | ||
| 0.34 | 0.39 | 0.18 | 1.15 | 0.110 | 478.26 | ||
| Eukaryotes | |||||||
| 4.21 | 5.55 | 11.20 | 69.50 | 0.008 | 0.29 | ||
| 2.50 | 6.37 | 6.69 | 14.50 | 0.003 | 0.54 | ||
| 3.92 | 5.51 | 0.44 | 3.80 | 0.032 | 43.31 | ||
| 2.32 | 8.86 | 4.61 | 51.65 | 0.018 | 0.86 | ||
| 3.65 | 21.75 | 18.20 | 135.13 | 0.001 | 0.02 | ||
| 3.55 | 27.17 | 3.10 | 54.00 | 0.004* | 1.77 | ||
| 5.68 | 7.28 | 0.04 | 0.19 | 0.008 | 101.80 | ||
| 0.87 | 1.02 | 0.92 | 2.63 | 0.004 | 7.78 |
G + G is the effective genome size when including the total amount of coding (G) and noncoding DNA (G) that is estimated to be under purifying selection. Footnotes in u and u indicate data sources (rates pooled when multiple data sources are available), and, when absent, indicate data generated in this study (see Materials and Methods).
Haudry ).
Siepel ).
Halligan ).
Sung ).
Lee ).
Sung ).
Sung ).
Ossowski ).
Lipinski ).
Sung ); Ness ).
Schrider ).
Conrad ; O’Roak , 2012); Kong ; Campbell and Eichler (2013); Wang and Zhu (2014); The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium (2015).
Uchimura ).
Sung ).
Lynch ); (Zhu ).
Ossowski ); (Yang ).
Lipinski ).
Figure 1Relationship between the rate of indel events per generation per effective genome (u) and effective population size (N). (A) Regression: log10(u) = 2.23(0.48) – 0.73(0.07)log10N (r2 = 0.89, P = 6.81 × 10−8, d.f. = 13), with SE of parameter estimates shown in parentheses. Blue circles represent bacteria, red circles multicellular eukaryotes, and black circles unicellular eukaryotes, with all data summarized in Table 1. The full list of indel events for analyzed organisms is presented in Dataset S4. Chromosomal distributions of indel events at each site across all mutation-accumulation experiments are shown in Figure S1, A and B. (B) Relationship when adding the number of estimated noncoding sites under purifying selection into the effective genome size (G + G) for eukaryotic organisms. Regression: log10[uid(G + G)] = 3.49(0.66) – 0.87(0.09)log10N (r2 = 0.87, P = 3.13 × 10−7, d.f. = 13).
Figure 2Relationship between indel events per site per generation (u) and effective population size (N) after phylogenetic correction. (A) Standardized phylogenetically independent contrasts performed using Compare (Martins 2004), and the PDAP module in Mesquite (Garland ), with branch lengths of 1.0. The regression equation of the contrasts through the origin is: u = –0.60(0.07)N (r2 = 0.83, P = 1.28 × 10−6, d.f. = 13), with SE in parentheses. (B) Phylogenetic tree showing the relationship between organisms.
Figure 3Relationship between the rate of indel events per site per generation (u), and the base-substitution mutation rate per site per generation (u). Regression: log10(u) = –1.56(0.74) + 0.91(0.08) log10u (r2 = 0.90, P = 4.13 × 10−8, d.f. = 13). SE measurements are shown in parentheses. Blue circles represent eubacteria, red circles multicellular eukaryotes, and black circles unicellular eukaryotes, with all data summarized in Table 1.