» Articles » PMID: 17028334

The Distribution of Beneficial Mutant Effects Under Strong Selection

Overview
Journal Genetics
Specialty Genetics
Date 2006 Oct 10
PMID 17028334
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

For a general theory of adaptation, it is essential to know the distribution of fitness effects of beneficial mutations. Recent theoretical and empirical studies have made considerable progress in determining the characteristics of this distribution. To date, the experiments have largely verified the theoretical predictions. Despite the fact that the theoretical work has assumed small selection coefficients, strong selection has been observed in some experiments, especially those involving novel environments. Here, we derive the distribution of fitness effects among fixed beneficial mutants without the restriction of low selection coefficients. The fate of strongly favored alleles is less affected by stochastic drift while rare, causing the distribution of fitness effects among fixed beneficial mutations to reflect more closely the distribution among all newly arising beneficial mutations. We also find that when many alleles compete for fixation within an asexual population (clonal interference), the beneficial effects of a newly fixed mutant cannot be well estimated because of the high number of subsequent mutations that arise within the genome, regardless of whether selection is strong or weak.

Citing Articles

Carry-over effects and fitness trade-offs in marine life histories: The costs of complexity for adaptation.

Marshall D, Connallon T Evol Appl. 2023; 16(2):474-485.

PMID: 36793690 PMC: 9923492. DOI: 10.1111/eva.13477.


Precise measurement of the fitness effects of spontaneous mutations by droplet digital PCR in Burkholderia cenocepacia.

Rana A, Patton D, Turner N, Dillon M, Cooper V, Sung W Genetics. 2021; 219(2).

PMID: 34849876 PMC: 8633095. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab117.


A mutational hotspot that determines highly repeatable evolution can be built and broken by silent genetic changes.

Horton J, Flanagan L, Jackson R, Priest N, Taylor T Nat Commun. 2021; 12(1):6092.

PMID: 34667151 PMC: 8526746. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26286-9.


Establishment and equilibrium levels of deleterious mutations in large populations.

Viljoen J, de Villiers J, van Zyl A, Mezzavilla M, Pepper M Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1):10384.

PMID: 31316137 PMC: 6637196. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46803-7.


Metabolite toxicity determines the pace of molecular evolution within microbial populations.

Lilja E, Johnson D BMC Evol Biol. 2017; 17(1):52.

PMID: 28196465 PMC: 5310025. DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-0906-2.


References
1.
Wang R, Stec A, Hey J, Lukens L, Doebley J . The limits of selection during maize domestication. Nature. 1999; 398(6724):236-9. DOI: 10.1038/18435. View

2.
Miralles R, Gerrish P, Moya A, Elena S . Clonal interference and the evolution of RNA viruses. Science. 1999; 285(5434):1745-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.285.5434.1745. View

3.
Bull J, Badgett M, Wichman H . Big-benefit mutations in a bacteriophage inhibited with heat. Mol Biol Evol. 2000; 17(6):942-50. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026375. View

4.
Orr H . The rate of adaptation in asexuals. Genetics. 2000; 155(2):961-8. PMC: 1461099. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/155.2.961. View

5.
Otto S, Jones C . Detecting the undetected: estimating the total number of loci underlying a quantitative trait. Genetics. 2000; 156(4):2093-107. PMC: 1461347. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/156.4.2093. View