| Literature DB >> 30190561 |
Danna R Gifford1,2, Rok Krašovec3, Elizabeth Aston4, Roman V Belavkin5, Alastair Channon4, Christopher G Knight6.
Abstract
Evolutionary rescue following environmental change requires mutations permitting population growth in the new environment. If change is severe enough to prevent most of the population reproducing, rescue becomes reliant on mutations already present. If change is sustained, the fitness effects in both environments, and how they are associated-termed 'environmental pleiotropy'-may determine which alleles are ultimately favoured. A population's demographic history-its size over time-influences the variation present. Although demographic history is known to affect the probability of evolutionary rescue, how it interacts with environmental pleiotropy during severe and sustained environmental change remains unexplored. Here, we demonstrate how these factors interact during antibiotic resistance evolution, a key example of evolutionary rescue fuelled by pre-existing mutations with pleiotropic fitness effects. We combine published data with novel simulations to characterise environmental pleiotropy and its effects on resistance evolution under different demographic histories. Comparisons among resistance alleles typically revealed no correlation for fitness-i.e., neutral pleiotropy-above and below the sensitive strain's minimum inhibitory concentration. Resistance allele frequency following experimental evolution showed opposing correlations with their fitness effects in the presence and absence of antibiotic. Simulations demonstrated that effects of environmental pleiotropy on allele frequencies depended on demographic history. At the population level, the major influence of environmental pleiotropy was on mean fitness, rather than the probability of evolutionary rescue or diversity. Our work suggests that determining both environmental pleiotropy and demographic history is critical for predicting resistance evolution, and we discuss the practicalities of this during in vivo evolution.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30190561 PMCID: PMC6180006 DOI: 10.1038/s41437-018-0137-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heredity (Edinb) ISSN: 0018-067X Impact factor: 3.821
List of variables and parameters for simulated resistance evolution
|
| ||
|
| Time (generations) | |
|
| Population size of mutant allele | |
|
| New mutant | |
|
| Value(s) | |
|
| Population carrying capacity | 109 |
|
| Initial population size of sensitive | 105, 106, 107, 108 |
|
| Generations between bottlenecks | 10 |
|
| Death rate | 0, 0.01, 0.02,…,0.1 |
|
| Bottleneck size (% surviving) | 0.1, 1, 10% |
|
| Duration of simulated evolution (generations) | 500 |
|
| Number of generations spent in antibiotic-free environment | 100, 200, 300, 400 |
|
| ||
|
| Number of resistance mutations | 50 |
|
| Strain or mutation identifier | |
| 1 ≤ | ||
|
| Antibiotic-free mean growth rate | 1.1365239 |
|
| Antibiotic-free standard deviation of growth rate | 0.2161931 |
|
| Antibiotic-containing mean growth rate | 0.9311666 |
|
| Antibiotic-containing standard deviation of growth rate | 0.2946277 |
|
| Growth rate of mutant | |
|
| Sensitive ancestor growth rate (antibiotic-free) | 2 |
|
| Sensitive ancestor growth rate (antibiotic-containing) | 0 |
|
| Global mutation rate to resistance | 10−8 |
|
| Frequency of occurrence of mutation | ~Uniform (0, |
Values for and are estimated from rifampicin-resistant E. coli K-12 growth data at 0 and 37.2 mg/L rifampicin (Lindsey et al. 2013). μ is estimated in Krašovec et al. (2014).
Fig. 1a Pearson correlation coefficients for fitness measured between pairs of antibiotic concentrations in antibiotic resistant E. coli K-12. black borders indicate significance at p < 0.05, red arrows indicate the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the sensitive ancestor. b Relationship between antibiotic-free and antibiotic-containing fitness in 8 rifampicin-resistant Pseudomonas species (60 mg/L for P. aeruginosa PAO1 and 30 mg/L for all others). Data sources given in Table S1.
Spearman rank correlation between antibiotic-free and antibiotic-containing fitness in Pseudomonas species (shown in Fig. 1b).
| Species | Estimate |
| Statistic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0659 | 13 | 340 | 0.835 | |
| 0.2364 | 11 | 168 | 0.485 | |
| 0.3113 | 17 | 562 | 0.223 | |
| 0.1518 | 25 | 1950 | 0.479 | |
| 0.1409 | 24 | 1980 | 0.511 | |
| −0.0500 | 16 | 714 | 0.856 | |
| 0.4303 | 10 | 94 | 0.218 | |
| 0.3934 | 23 | 1230 | 0.063 |
Fig. 2Frequency of rifampicin resistant mutants observed following selection for rifampicin resistance in E. coli K-12 and P. fluorescens Pf0-1, versus a frequency observed during fluctuation test in the absence of selection for resistance, b fitness in antibiotic-free environment, and c fitness in antibiotic-containing environment. (Fitness normalised to represent data on a common scale). Data sources given in Table S1.
Fig. 3In simulations of sustained selection for antibiotic resistance, the effects of a locus mutation rate, b fitness in the antibiotic-free environment, and c antibiotic-containing fitness on resistance allele frequency varied under different scenarios for environmental pleiotropy. Data show the Pearson correlation across 100 replicate simulations. Error bars show the upper and lower 95% correlation coefficient confidence limits. Parameter values are given in Table 1 (Results for t = 200 or 400, d = 0 and N0(0) = 105 shown. See Figures S4 and S5 for additional parameter value simulations.)
Fig. 4Simulated variation in demographic history (i.e., generations in antibiotic-free conditions and bottleneck size) and environmental pleiotropy influenced population-level adaptation to sustained antibiotic resistance selection. Evolutionary rescue (a) and mean resistance diversity (i.e., number of resistance alleles in the population, b were both influenced by demography, but not pleiotropy. Mean population growth rate (in the presence of antibiotic, c following simulated resistance evolution was influenced by both demography and pleiotropy. For b and c, error bars represent ±1 standard deviation. Parameter values are given in Table 1 (Results summarised over 100 replicate simulations for t = 200 or 400, d = 0 and N0(0) = 105 shown. See Figures S6 and S7 for additional parameter value simulations.)