Genomic buffering mitigates the effects of deleterious mutations in bacteria

The relationship between the number of randomly accumulated mutations in a genome and fitness is a key parameter in evolutionary biology. Mutations may interact such that their combined effect on fitness is additive (no epistasis), reinforced (synergistic epistasis) or mitigated (antagonistic epistasis). We measured the decrease in fitness caused by increasing mutation number in the bacterium Salmonella typhimurium using a regulated, error-prone DNA polymerase (polymerase IV, DinB). As mutations accumulated, fitness costs increased at a diminishing rate. This suggests that random mutations interact such that their combined effect on fitness is mitigated and that the genome is buffered against the fitness reduction caused by accumulated mutations. Levels of the heat shock chaperones DnaK and GroEL increased in lineages that had accumulated many mutations, and experimental overproduction of GroEL further increased the fitness of lineages containing deleterious mutations. These findings suggest that overexpression of chaperones contributes to antagonistic epistasis.

[1]  M. Kimura,et al.  The mutational load with epistatic gene interactions in fitness. , 1966, Genetics.

[2]  T. Mukai The Genetic Structure of Natural Populations of DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER. VII Synergistic Interaction of Spontaneous Mutant Polygenes Controlling Viability. , 1969, Genetics.

[3]  D. Ruppert,et al.  Transformation and Weighting in Regression , 1988 .

[4]  A. Kondrashov Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction , 1988, Nature.

[5]  G. Wagner,et al.  QUANTITATIVE VARIATION IN FINITE PARTHENOGENETIC POPULATIONS: WHAT STOPS MULLER'S RATCHET IN THE ABSENCE OF RECOMBINATION? , 1990, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  R. Lande RISK OF POPULATION EXTINCTION FROM FIXATION OF NEW DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS , 1994, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[7]  M. Whitlock,et al.  MULTIPLE FITNESS PEAKS AND EPISTASIS , 1995 .

[8]  Marie Davidian,et al.  Nonlinear Models for Repeated Measurement Data , 1995 .

[9]  Michael Lynch,et al.  Estimate of the genomic mutation rate deleterious to overall fitness in E. coll , 1996, Nature.

[10]  J. D. de Visser,et al.  An experimental test for synergistic epistasis and its application in Chlamydomonas. , 1997, Genetics.

[11]  R. Hoekstra,et al.  TEST OF INTERACTION BETWEEN GENETIC MARKERS THAT AFFECT FITNESS IN ASPERGILLUS NIGER , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[12]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Genome‐wide hypermutation in a subpopulation of stationary‐phase cells underlies recombination‐dependent adaptive mutation , 1997, The EMBO journal.

[13]  M. Yamada,et al.  Multiple pathways for SOS-induced mutagenesis in Escherichia coli: an overexpression of dinB/dinP results in strongly enhancing mutagenesis in the absence of any exogenous treatment to damage DNA. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  R. Lenski,et al.  Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria , 1997, Nature.

[15]  S. Lindquist,et al.  Hsp90 as a capacitor for morphological evolution , 1998, Nature.

[16]  C. Ofria,et al.  Genome complexity, robustness and genetic interactions in digital organisms , 1999, Nature.

[17]  M. Wade,et al.  Epistasis and the Evolutionary Process , 2000 .

[18]  A. D. Peters,et al.  A test for epistasis among induced mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans. , 2000, Genetics.

[19]  Art Poon,et al.  COMPENSATING FOR OUR LOAD OF MUTATIONS: FREEZING THE MELTDOWN OF SMALL POPULATIONS , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[20]  M. Whitlock,et al.  FACTORS AFFECTING THE GENETIC LOAD IN DROSOPHILA: SYNERGISTIC EPISTASIS AND CORRELATIONS AMONG FITNESS COMPONENTS , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  B. Bukau,et al.  Genetic dissection of the roles of chaperones and proteases in protein folding and degradation in the Escherichia coli cytosol , 2001, Molecular microbiology.

[22]  C. Wilke,et al.  Interaction between directional epistasis and average mutational effects , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  S. Lindquist,et al.  Hsp90 as a capacitor of phenotypic variation , 2002, Nature.

[24]  Santiago F. Elena,et al.  Endosymbiotic bacteria: GroEL buffers against deleterious mutations , 2002, Nature.

[25]  R. H.J.MULLE THE RELATION OF RECOMBINATION TO MUTATIONAL ADVANCE , 2002 .

[26]  R. Korona,et al.  Small fitness effects and weak genetic interactions between deleterious mutations in heterozygous loci of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2003, Genetical research.

[27]  O. Berg,et al.  Regulating general mutation rates: examination of the hypermutable state model for Cairnsian adaptive mutation. , 2003, Genetics.

[28]  Rafael Sanjuán,et al.  The contribution of epistasis to the architecture of fitness in an RNA virus. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  C. Petropoulos,et al.  Evidence for Positive Epistasis in HIV-1 , 2004, Science.

[30]  Christina L. Burch,et al.  Epistasis and Its Relationship to Canalization in the RNA Virus φ6 , 2004, Genetics.