» Articles » PMID: 22110756

The Influence of Deleterious Mutations on Adaptation in Asexual Populations

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2011 Nov 24
PMID 22110756
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We study the dynamics of adaptation in asexual populations that undergo both beneficial and deleterious mutations. In particular, how the deleterious mutations affect the fixation of beneficial mutations was investigated. Using extensive Monte Carlo simulations, we find that in the "strong-selection weak mutation (SSWM)" regime or in the "clonal interference (CI)" regime, deleterious mutations rarely influence the distribution of "selection coefficients of the fixed mutations (SCFM)"; while in the "multiple mutations" regime, the accumulation of deleterious mutations would lead to a decrease in fitness significantly. We conclude that the effects of deleterious mutations on adaptation depend largely on the supply of beneficial mutations. And interestingly, the lowest adaptation rate occurs for a moderate value of selection coefficient of deleterious mutations.

Citing Articles

Interference Effects of Deleterious and Beneficial Mutations in Large Asexual Populations.

Jain K Genetics. 2019; 211(4):1357-1369.

PMID: 30700529 PMC: 6456326. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.119.301960.


Dynamics and Fate of Beneficial Mutations Under Lineage Contamination by Linked Deleterious Mutations.

Penisson S, Singh T, Sniegowski P, Gerrish P Genetics. 2017; 205(3):1305-1318.

PMID: 28100591 PMC: 5340340. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.116.194597.


Deleterious passengers in adapting populations.

Good B, Desai M Genetics. 2014; 198(3):1183-208.

PMID: 25194161 PMC: 4224160. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.114.170233.


Chimaeric load among sympatric social bacteria increases with genotype richness.

Mendes-Soares H, Chen I, Fitzpatrick K, Velicer G Proc Biol Sci. 2014; 281(1787).

PMID: 24870038 PMC: 4071536. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2014.0285.


Relative effects of segregation and recombination on the evolution of sex in finite diploid populations.

Jiang X, Hu S, Xu Q, Chang Y, Tao S Heredity (Edinb). 2013; 111(6):505-12.

PMID: 23900397 PMC: 3833686. DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2013.72.

References
1.
Orr H . The distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations. Genetics. 2003; 163(4):1519-26. PMC: 1462510. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/163.4.1519. View

2.
Sanjuan R, Moya A, Elena S . The distribution of fitness effects caused by single-nucleotide substitutions in an RNA virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(22):8396-401. PMC: 420405. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0400146101. View

3.
Charlesworth B . The effect of background selection against deleterious mutations on weakly selected, linked variants. Genet Res. 1994; 63(3):213-27. DOI: 10.1017/s0016672300032365. View

4.
Park S, Krug J . Clonal interference in large populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(46):18135-40. PMC: 2084309. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0705778104. View

5.
Kimura M . On the probability of fixation of mutant genes in a population. Genetics. 1962; 47:713-9. PMC: 1210364. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/47.6.713. View