» Articles » PMID: 27053750

Factors Influencing the Effect Size Distribution of Adaptive Substitutions

Overview
Journal Proc Biol Sci
Specialty Biology
Date 2016 Apr 8
PMID 27053750
Citations 36
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The distribution of effect sizes of adaptive substitutions has been central to evolutionary biology since the modern synthesis. Early theory proposed that because large-effect mutations have negative pleiotropic consequences, only small-effect mutations contribute to adaptation. More recent theory suggested instead that large-effect mutations could be favoured when populations are far from their adaptive peak. Here we suggest that the distributions of effect sizes are expected to differ among study systems, reflecting the wide variation in evolutionary forces and ecological conditions experienced in nature. These include selection, mutation, genetic drift, gene flow, and other factors such as the degree of pleiotropy, the distance to the phenotypic optimum, whether the optimum is stable or moving, and whether new mutation or standing genetic variation provides the source of adaptive alleles. Our goal is to review how these factors might affect the distribution of effect sizes and to identify new research directions. Until more theory and empirical work is available, we feel that it is premature to make broad generalizations about the effect size distribution of adaptive substitutions important in nature.

Citing Articles

Adaptive evolution of CENP-T modulates centromere binding.

Dudka D, Nguyen A, Boese K, Marescal O, Akins R, Black B Curr Biol. 2025; 35(5):1012-1022.e5.

PMID: 39947176 PMC: 11903153. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2025.01.017.


Predicting the direction of phenotypic difference.

Gokhman D, Harris K, Carmi S, Greenbaum G bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38895291 PMC: 11185551. DOI: 10.1101/2024.02.22.581566.


A large-effect fitness trade-off across environments is explained by a single mutation affecting cold acclimation.

Lee G, Sanderson B, Ellis T, Dilkes B, McKay J, Agren J Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(6):e2317461121.

PMID: 38289961 PMC: 10861903. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2317461121.


A life-history allele of large effect shortens developmental time in a wild insect population.

Cheng S, Jacobs C, Mogollon Perez E, Chen D, van de Sanden J, Bretscher K Nat Ecol Evol. 2023; 8(1):70-82.

PMID: 37957313 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-023-02246-y.


Genetic Architecture of Flowering Time Differs Between Populations With Contrasting Demographic and Selective Histories.

Neto C, Hancock A Mol Biol Evol. 2023; 40(8).

PMID: 37603463 PMC: 10461413. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msad185.


References
1.
Mills M, Greenwood A, Peichel C . Pleiotropic effects of a single gene on skeletal development and sensory system patterning in sticklebacks. Evodevo. 2014; 5(1):5. PMC: 3976036. DOI: 10.1186/2041-9139-5-5. View

2.
Olson-Manning C, Wagner M, Mitchell-Olds T . Adaptive evolution: evaluating empirical support for theoretical predictions. Nat Rev Genet. 2012; 13(12):867-77. PMC: 3748133. DOI: 10.1038/nrg3322. View

3.
Andersson L . Molecular consequences of animal breeding. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2013; 23(3):295-301. DOI: 10.1016/j.gde.2013.02.014. View

4.
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

5.
Albert A, Sawaya S, Vines T, Knecht A, Miller C, Summers B . The genetics of adaptive shape shift in stickleback: pleiotropy and effect size. Evolution. 2007; 62(1):76-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00259.x. View