» Articles » PMID: 25778704

Selection on Noise Constrains Variation in a Eukaryotic Promoter

Overview
Journal Nature
Specialty Science
Date 2015 Mar 18
PMID 25778704
Citations 87
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Genetic variation segregating within a species reflects the combined activities of mutation, selection, and genetic drift. In the absence of selection, polymorphisms are expected to be a random subset of new mutations; thus, comparing the effects of polymorphisms and new mutations provides a test for selection. When evidence of selection exists, such comparisons can identify properties of mutations that are most likely to persist in natural populations. Here we investigate how mutation and selection have shaped variation in a cis-regulatory sequence controlling gene expression by empirically determining the effects of polymorphisms segregating in the TDH3 promoter among 85 strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and comparing their effects to a distribution of mutational effects defined by 236 point mutations in the same promoter. Surprisingly, we find that selection on expression noise (that is, variability in expression among genetically identical cells) appears to have had a greater impact on sequence variation in the TDH3 promoter than selection on mean expression level. This is not necessarily because variation in expression noise impacts fitness more than variation in mean expression level, but rather because of differences in the distributions of mutational effects for these two phenotypes. This study shows how systematically examining the effects of new mutations can enrich our understanding of evolutionary mechanisms. It also provides rare empirical evidence of selection acting on expression noise.

Citing Articles

Single-cell eQTL mapping in yeast reveals a tradeoff between growth and reproduction.

Boocock J, Alexander N, Alamo Tapia L, Walter-McNeill L, Patel S, Munugala C Elife. 2025; 13.

PMID: 40073070 PMC: 11903034. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.95566.


The impact of phenotypic heterogeneity on fungal pathogenicity and drug resistance.

Kozubowski L, Berman J FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2025; 49.

PMID: 39809571 PMC: 11756289. DOI: 10.1093/femsre/fuaf001.


Linking molecular mechanisms to their evolutionary consequences: a primer.

Grah R, Guet C, Tkacik G, Lagator M Genetics. 2024; 229(2).

PMID: 39601269 PMC: 11796464. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyae191.


Promoters Constrain Evolution of Expression Levels of Essential Genes in Escherichia coli.

Tsuru S, Hatanaka N, Furusawa C Mol Biol Evol. 2024; 41(9).

PMID: 39219319 PMC: 11406756. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msae185.


TF-High-Evolutionary: In Vivo Mutagenesis of Gene Regulatory Networks for the Study of the Genetics and Evolution of the Drosophila Regulatory Genome.

Li X, Srinivasan V, Laiker I, Misunou N, Frankel N, Pallares L Mol Biol Evol. 2024; 41(8).

PMID: 39117360 PMC: 11342961. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msae167.


References
1.
Hittinger C . Saccharomyces diversity and evolution: a budding model genus. Trends Genet. 2013; 29(5):309-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2013.01.002. View

2.
Batada N, Hurst L . Evolution of chromosome organization driven by selection for reduced gene expression noise. Nat Genet. 2007; 39(8):945-9. DOI: 10.1038/ng2071. View

3.
McAlister L, Holland M . Differential expression of the three yeast glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase genes. J Biol Chem. 1985; 260(28):15019-27. View

4.
Yagi S, Yagi K, Fukuoka J, Suzuki M . The UAS of the yeast GAPDH promoter consists of multiple general functional elements including RAP1 and GRF2 binding sites. J Vet Med Sci. 1994; 56(2):235-44. DOI: 10.1292/jvms.56.235. View

5.
Kwasnieski J, Mogno I, Myers C, Corbo J, Cohen B . Complex effects of nucleotide variants in a mammalian cis-regulatory element. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(47):19498-503. PMC: 3511131. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1210678109. View