| Literature DB >> 31624294 |
Nathanael Lampe1, Pierre Marin1, Marianne Coulon1, Pierre Micheau1, Lydia Maigne1, David Sarramia1, Fabrice Piquemal2,3, Sébastien Incerti3, David G Biron4, Camille Ghio4, Télesphore Sime-Ngando4, Thomas Hindre5, Vincent Breton1.
Abstract
Over millennia, life has been exposed to ionizing radiation from cosmic rays and natural radioisotopes. Biological experiments in underground laboratories have recently demonstrated that the contemporary terrestrial radiation background impacts the physiology of living organisms, yet the evolutionary consequences of this biological stress have not been investigated. Explaining the mechanisms that give rise to the results of underground biological experiments remains difficult, and it has been speculated that hereditary mechanisms may be involved. Here, we have used evolution experiments in standard and very low-radiation backgrounds to demonstrate that environmental ionizing radiation does not significantly impact the evolutionary trajectories of E. coli bacterial populations in a 500 generations evolution experiment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31624294 PMCID: PMC6797783 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51519-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Number of replicates and mean fitnesses relative to ancestor at each time point and location.
| Environment | Gen |
| Fitness | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LPC | 0 | 6 | 1.00 ± 0.05 | — |
| 200 | 8 | 1.02 ± 0.08 | 0.19 | |
| 500 | 6 | 1.12 ± 0.06 | 1.2 × 10−3 | |
| LSM | 0 | 6 | 0.98 ± 0.05 | — |
| 200 | 9 | 1.02 ± 0.05 | 0.14 | |
| 500 | 9 | 1.09 ± 0.06 | 8.7 × 10−4 |
aThis is the likelihood that the fitness measured is different to that at 0 generations.
Figure 1Measurements of relative fitness at the LPC and LSM. Evolved populations were competed against an ancestral clone and relative fitness were calculated as described in methods. Each semi-transparent point is the mean of up to six replicates (error bars show ), and their spread along the generation axis is to aid visibility. The ensemble means are shown as opaque.
Figure 2Comparison of the distributions of relative fitness values to ancestor for populations evolved at LPC and LSM for 0, 200 and 500 generations. The histogram shows all measurements (each replicated competition having a total weight of 1) while the points show the mean fitness (with error bars) of each replicate. The vertical position of these points is varied for clarity only. p is the probability that the observed distributions diverge from each other.
Figure 3Relative fitness values from direct competitions between LSM and LPC populations evolved for 500 generations. Evolved populations from LSM were competed against evolved populations from LPC but with the opposite arabinose marker. All competitions were done in the LPC environment. Markers show the mean and errors for each set of lineages competed. Overall, the relative fitness of the lineages grown in the LSM compared to the LPC is 1.01 ± 0.05.