Literature DB >> 33081612

Mutation bias can shape adaptation in large asexual populations experiencing clonal interference.

Kevin Gomez1, Jason Bertram2,3, Joanna Masel4.   

Abstract

The extended evolutionary synthesis invokes a role for development in shaping adaptive evolution, which in population genetics terms corresponds to mutation-biased adaptation. Critics have claimed that clonal interference makes mutation-biased adaptation rare. We consider the behaviour of two simultaneously adapting traits, one with larger mutation rate U, the other with larger selection coefficient s, using asexual travelling wave models. We find that adaptation is dominated by whichever trait has the faster rate of adaptation v in isolation, with the other trait subject to evolutionary stalling. Reviewing empirical claims for mutation-biased adaptation, we find that not all occur in the 'origin-fixation' regime of population genetics where v is only twice as sensitive to s as to U. In some cases, differences in U are at least ten to twelve times larger than differences in s, as needed to cause mutation-biased adaptation even in the 'multiple mutations' regime. Surprisingly, when U > s in the 'diffusive-mutation' regime, the required sensitivity ratio is also only two, despite pervasive clonal interference. Given two traits with identical v, the benefit of having higher s is surprisingly small, occurring largely when one trait is at the boundary between the origin-fixation and multiple mutations regimes.

Keywords:  developmental bias; elasticity; modern synthesis; mutation-driven adaptation; parallel adaptation; standard evolutionary theory

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33081612      PMCID: PMC7661309          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  39 in total

1.  The solitary wave of asexual evolution.

Authors:  Igor M Rouzine; John Wakeley; John M Coffin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-01-13       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions and predictions.

Authors:  Kevin N Laland; Tobias Uller; Marcus W Feldman; Kim Sterelny; Gerd B Müller; Armin Moczek; Eva Jablonka; John Odling-Smee
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-08-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  An empirical test of the mutational landscape model of adaptation using a single-stranded DNA virus.

Authors:  Darin R Rokyta; Paul Joyce; S Brian Caudle; Holly A Wichman
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2005-03-20       Impact factor: 38.330

4.  The application of statistical physics to evolutionary biology.

Authors:  Guy Sella; Aaron E Hirsh
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Beneficial mutation selection balance and the effect of linkage on positive selection.

Authors:  Michael M Desai; Daniel S Fisher
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Predicting patterns of long-term adaptation and extinction with population genetics.

Authors:  J Bertram; K Gomez; J Masel
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  Deleterious passengers in adapting populations.

Authors:  Benjamin H Good; Michael M Desai
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  Mutation-Driven Parallel Evolution during Viral Adaptation.

Authors:  Andrew M Sackman; Lindsey W McGee; Anneliese J Morrison; Jessica Pierce; Jeremy Anisman; Hunter Hamilton; Stephanie Sanderbeck; Cayla Newman; Darin R Rokyta
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 16.240

9.  Quantitative evolutionary dynamics using high-resolution lineage tracking.

Authors:  Sasha F Levy; Jamie R Blundell; Sandeep Venkataram; Dmitri A Petrov; Daniel S Fisher; Gavin Sherlock
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  5 in total

1.  Population size mediates the contribution of high-rate and large-benefit mutations to parallel evolution.

Authors:  Martijn F Schenk; Mark P Zwart; Sungmin Hwang; Philip Ruelens; Edouard Severing; Joachim Krug; J Arjan G M de Visser
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 19.100

2.  Differences in evolutionary accessibility determine which equally effective regulatory motif evolves to generate pulses.

Authors:  Kun Xiong; Mark Gerstein; Joanna Masel
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 4.402

3.  Clonal Interference and Mutation Bias in Small Bacterial Populations in Droplets.

Authors:  Philip Ruelens; J Arjan G M de Visser
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.096

4.  Phenotype Bias Determines How Natural RNA Structures Occupy the Morphospace of All Possible Shapes.

Authors:  Kamaludin Dingle; Fatme Ghaddar; Petr Šulc; Ard A Louis
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  Mutation bias shapes the spectrum of adaptive substitutions.

Authors:  Alejandro V Cano; Hana Rozhoňová; Arlin Stoltzfus; David M McCandlish; Joshua L Payne
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 11.205

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.