Literature DB >> 33598971

Addressing Darwin's dilemma: Can pseudo-overdominance explain persistent inbreeding depression and load?

Donald M Waller1.   

Abstract

Darwin spent years investigating the effects of self-fertilization, concluding that "nature abhors perpetual self-fertilization." Given that selection purges inbred populations of strongly deleterious mutations and drift fixes mild mutations, why does inbreeding depression (ID) persist in highly inbred taxa and why do no purely selfing taxa exist? Background selection, associations and interference among loci, and drift within small inbred populations all limit selection while often increasing fixation. These mechanisms help to explain why more inbred populations in most species consistently show more fixed load. This drift load is manifest in the considerable heterosis regularly observed in between-population crosses. Such heterosis results in subsequent high ID, suggesting a mechanism by which small populations could retain variation and inbreeding load. Multiple deleterious recessive mutations linked in repulsion generate pseudo-overdominance. Many tightly linked load loci could generate a balanced segregating load high enough to sustain ID over many generations. Such pseudo-overdominance blocks (or "PODs") are more likely to occur in regions of low recombination. They should also result in clear genetic signatures including genomic hotspots of heterozygosity; distinct haplotypes supporting alleles at intermediate frequency; and high linkage disequilibrium in and around POD regions. Simulation and empirical studies tend to support these predictions. Additional simulations and comparative genomic analyses should explore POD dynamics in greater detail to resolve whether PODs exist in sufficient strength and number to account for why ID and load persist within inbred lineages.
© 2021 The Authors. Evolution © 2021 The Society for the Study of Evolution.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Drift load; genetic load; genomic architecture; heterozygosity-fitness correlation; purging

Year:  2021        PMID: 33598971     DOI: 10.1111/evo.14189

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  8 in total

1.  The evolution of recombination in self-fertilizing organisms.

Authors:  Roman Stetsenko; Denis Roze
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 4.402

2.  Improving genomic predictions with inbreeding and nonadditive effects in two admixed maize hybrid populations in single and multienvironment contexts.

Authors:  Morgane Roth; Aurélien Beugnot; Tristan Mary-Huard; Laurence Moreau; Alain Charcosset; Julie B Fiévet
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 4.402

3.  Extent of wild-to-crop interspecific introgression in grapevine (Vitis vinifera) as a consequence of resistance breeding and implications for the crop species definition.

Authors:  Serena Foria; Gabriele Magris; Irena Jurman; Rachel Schwope; Massimo De Candido; Elisa De Luca; Dragoslav Ivanišević; Michele Morgante; Gabriele Di Gaspero
Journal:  Hortic Res       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 7.291

4.  Slow Recovery from Inbreeding Depression Generated by the Complex Genetic Architecture of Segregating Deleterious Mutations.

Authors:  Paula E Adams; Anna B Crist; Ellen M Young; John H Willis; Patrick C Phillips; Janna L Fierst
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 8.800

5.  Domestication reshaped the genetic basis of inbreeding depression in a maize landrace compared to its wild relative, teosinte.

Authors:  Luis Fernando Samayoa; Bode A Olukolu; Chin Jian Yang; Qiuyue Chen; Markus G Stetter; Alessandra M York; Jose de Jesus Sanchez-Gonzalez; Jeffrey C Glaubitz; Peter J Bradbury; Maria Cinta Romay; Qi Sun; Jinliang Yang; Jeffrey Ross-Ibarra; Edward S Buckler; John F Doebley; James B Holland
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 5.917

6.  The effects of weak selection on neutral diversity at linked sites.

Authors:  Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 4.402

7.  Genome sequencing of adapted diploid potato clones.

Authors:  Sai Reddy Achakkagari; Maria Kyriakidou; Kyle M Gardner; David De Koeyer; Hielke De Jong; Martina V Strömvik; Helen H Tai
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 6.627

8.  Recovering individual haplotypes and a contiguous genome assembly from pooled long-read sequencing of the diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae).

Authors:  Samuel Whiteford; Arjen E Van't Hof; Ritesh Krishna; Thea Marubbi; Stephanie Widdison; Ilik J Saccheri; Marcus Guest; Neil I Morrison; Alistair C Darby
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 3.542

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.