Literature DB >> 31488516

Comparison of the Full Distribution of Fitness Effects of New Amino Acid Mutations Across Great Apes.

David Castellano1, Moisès Coll Macià2, Paula Tataru2, Thomas Bataillon2, Kasper Munch2.   

Abstract

The distribution of fitness effects (DFE) is central to many questions in evolutionary biology. However, little is known about the differences in DFE between closely related species. We use >9000 coding genes orthologous one-to-one across great apes, gibbons, and macaques to assess the stability of the DFE across great apes. We use the unfolded site frequency spectrum of polymorphic mutations (n = 8 haploid chromosomes per population) to estimate the DFE. We find that the shape of the deleterious DFE is strikingly similar across great apes. We confirm that effective population size (Ne ) is a strong predictor of the strength of negative selection, consistent with the nearly neutral theory. However, we also find that the strength of negative selection varies more than expected given the differences in Ne between species. Across species, mean fitness effects of new deleterious mutations covaries with Ne , consistent with positive epistasis among deleterious mutations. We find that the strength of negative selection for the smallest populations, bonobos and western chimpanzees, is higher than expected given their Ne This may result from a more efficient purging of strongly deleterious recessive variants in these populations. Forward simulations confirm that these findings are not artifacts of the way we are inferring Ne and DFE parameters. All findings are replicated using only GC-conservative mutations, thereby confirming that GC-biased gene conversion is not affecting our conclusions.
Copyright © 2019 by the Genetics Society of America.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DFE; beneficial mutations; compensatory evolution; deleterious mutations; effective population size; epistasis

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31488516      PMCID: PMC6827385          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.119.302494

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


  65 in total

1.  On the number of segregating sites in genetical models without recombination.

Authors:  G A Watterson
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1975-04       Impact factor: 1.570

2.  Parental influence on human germline de novo mutations in 1,548 trios from Iceland.

Authors:  Hákon Jónsson; Patrick Sulem; Birte Kehr; Snaedis Kristmundsdottir; Florian Zink; Eirikur Hjartarson; Marteinn T Hardarson; Kristjan E Hjorleifsson; Hannes P Eggertsson; Sigurjon Axel Gudjonsson; Lucas D Ward; Gudny A Arnadottir; Einar A Helgason; Hannes Helgason; Arnaldur Gylfason; Adalbjorg Jonasdottir; Aslaug Jonasdottir; Thorunn Rafnar; Mike Frigge; Simon N Stacey; Olafur Th Magnusson; Unnur Thorsteinsdottir; Gisli Masson; Augustine Kong; Bjarni V Halldorsson; Agnar Helgason; Daniel F Gudbjartsson; Kari Stefansson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Inbreeding depression due to mildly deleterious mutations in finite populations: size does matter.

Authors:  T Bataillon; M Kirkpatrick
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  Compensating for our load of mutations: freezing the meltdown of small populations.

Authors:  A Poon; S P Otto
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  Adaptive evolution and effective population size in wild house mice.

Authors:  Megan Phifer-Rixey; François Bonhomme; Pierre Boursot; Gary A Churchill; Jaroslav Piálek; Priscilla K Tucker; Michael W Nachman
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 16.240

6.  Life history effects on the molecular clock of autosomes and sex chromosomes.

Authors:  Guy Amster; Guy Sella
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  The Time Scale of Recombination Rate Evolution in Great Apes.

Authors:  Laurie S Stevison; August E Woerner; Jeffrey M Kidd; Joanna L Kelley; Krishna R Veeramah; Kimberly F McManus; Carlos D Bustamante; Michael F Hammer; Jeffrey D Wall
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 16.240

8.  Direct estimation of mutations in great apes reconciles phylogenetic dating.

Authors:  Søren Besenbacher; Christina Hvilsom; Tomas Marques-Bonet; Thomas Mailund; Mikkel Heide Schierup
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 15.460

9.  Purifying selection and molecular adaptation in the genome of Verminephrobacter, the heritable symbiotic bacteria of earthworms.

Authors:  Kasper U Kjeldsen; Thomas Bataillon; Nicolás Pinel; Stéphane De Mita; Marie B Lund; Frank Panitz; Christian Bendixen; David A Stahl; Andreas Schramm
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.416

10.  Biased Inference of Selection Due to GC-Biased Gene Conversion and the Rate of Protein Evolution in Flycatchers When Accounting for It.

Authors:  Paulina Bolívar; Carina F Mugal; Matteo Rossi; Alexander Nater; Mi Wang; Ludovic Dutoit; Hans Ellegren
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 16.240

View more
  7 in total

1.  How Much Does Ne Vary Among Species?

Authors:  Nicolas Galtier; Marjolaine Rousselle
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Is adaptation limited by mutation? A timescale-dependent effect of genetic diversity on the adaptive substitution rate in animals.

Authors:  Marjolaine Rousselle; Paul Simion; Marie-Ka Tilak; Emeric Figuet; Benoit Nabholz; Nicolas Galtier
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 5.917

3.  Impact of Mutation Rate and Selection at Linked Sites on DNA Variation across the Genomes of Humans and Other Homininae.

Authors:  David Castellano; Adam Eyre-Walker; Kasper Munch
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.416

4.  Purifying Selection in Corvids Is Less Efficient on Islands.

Authors:  Verena E Kutschera; Jelmer W Poelstra; Fidel Botero-Castro; Nicolas Dussex; Neil J Gemmell; Gavin R Hunt; Michael G Ritchie; Christian Rutz; R Axel W Wiberg; Jochen B W Wolf
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  Inferring Parameters of the Distribution of Fitness Effects of New Mutations When Beneficial Mutations Are Strongly Advantageous and Rare.

Authors:  Tom R Booker
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 3.154

6.  Hunting for Beneficial Mutations: Conditioning on SIFT Scores When Estimating the Distribution of Fitness Effect of New Mutations.

Authors:  Jun Chen; Thomas Bataillon; Sylvain Glémin; Martin Lascoux
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 3.416

7.  Inferring Genome-Wide Correlations of Mutation Fitness Effects between Populations.

Authors:  Xin Huang; Alyssa Lyn Fortier; Alec J Coffman; Travis J Struck; Megan N Irby; Jennifer E James; José E León-Burguete; Aaron P Ragsdale; Ryan N Gutenkunst
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 16.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.