The effect of genetic robustness on evolvability in digital organisms

BackgroundRecent work has revealed that many biological systems keep functioning in the face of mutations and therefore can be considered genetically robust. However, several issues related to robustness remain poorly understood, such as its implications for evolvability (the ability to produce adaptive evolutionary innovations).ResultsHere, we use the Avida digital evolution platform to explore the effects of genetic robustness on evolvability. First, we obtained digital organisms with varying levels of robustness by evolving them under combinations of mutation rates and population sizes previously shown to select for different levels of robustness. Then, we assessed the ability of these organisms to adapt to novel environments in a variety of experimental conditions. The data consistently support that, for simple environments, genetic robustness fosters long-term evolvability, whereas, in the short-term, robustness is not beneficial for evolvability but may even be a counterproductive trait. For more complex environments, however, results are less conclusive.ConclusionThe finding that the effect of robustness on evolvability is time-dependent is compatible with previous results obtained using RNA folding algorithms and transcriptional regulation models. A likely scenario is that, in the short-term, genetic robustness hampers evolvability because it reduces the intensity of selection, but that, in the long-term, relaxed selection facilitates the accumulation of genetic diversity and thus, promotes evolutionary innovation.

[1]  H. A. Orr,et al.  The genetic theory of adaptation: a brief history , 2005, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[2]  A. Wagner Robustness and evolvability: a paradox resolved , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  Patrick C Phillips,et al.  The Opportunity for Canalization and the Evolution of Genetic Networks , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[4]  Progress on canalization , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  R Nussinov,et al.  Point mutations and sequence variability in proteins: Redistributions of preexisting populations , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  H. A. Orr,et al.  The rate of adaptation in asexuals. , 2000, Genetics.

[7]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Robustness Can Evolve Gradually in Complex Regulatory Gene Networks with Varying Topology , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[8]  G. Odell,et al.  The segment polarity network is a robust developmental module , 2000, Nature.

[9]  D. Krakauer,et al.  Redundancy, antiredundancy, and the robustness of genomes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Charles Ofria,et al.  EFFECTS OF POPULATION SIZE AND MUTATION RATE ON THE EVOLUTION OF MUTATIONAL ROBUSTNESS , 2007, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[11]  W. Fontana,et al.  Plasticity, evolvability, and modularity in RNA. , 2000, The Journal of experimental zoology.

[12]  Charles Ofria,et al.  Avida , 2004, Artificial Life.

[13]  Ricard V Solé,et al.  The Fittest versus the Flattest: Experimental Confirmation of the Quasispecies Effect with Subviral Pathogens , 2006, PLoS pathogens.

[14]  Jeffrey E. Barrick,et al.  Balancing Robustness and Evolvability , 2006, PLoS biology.

[15]  Thomas S. Ray,et al.  An Approach to the Synthesis of Life , 1991 .

[16]  G. Wagner,et al.  A POPULATION GENETIC THEORY OF CANALIZATION , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[17]  Rafael Sanjuán,et al.  Epistasis correlates to genomic complexity , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  G. Wagner,et al.  EVOLUTION AND DETECTION OF GENETIC ROBUSTNESS , 2003 .

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

[20]  A. Wagner Robustness and Evolvability in Living Systems , 2005 .

[21]  S. Frank Title Maladaptation and the Paradox of Robustness in Evolution Permalink , 2007 .

[22]  O. Tenaillon,et al.  Evolution of Mutational Robustness in an RNA Virus , 2005, PLoS biology.

[23]  A. Wagner,et al.  Innovation and robustness in complex regulatory gene networks , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  R. Lenski,et al.  The fate of competing beneficial mutations in an asexual population , 2004, Genetica.

[25]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Robustness and evolvability in genetic regulatory networks. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[26]  S. Stearns,et al.  The differential genetic and environmental canalization of fitness components in Drosophila melanogaster , 1995 .

[27]  F. Arnold,et al.  Protein stability promotes evolvability. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  C. Ofria,et al.  Evolution of digital organisms at high mutation rates leads to survival of the flattest , 2001, Nature.

[29]  L. Hurst,et al.  Evolution of chromosome organization driven by selection for reduced gene expression noise , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[30]  Ben Lehner Selection to minimise noise in living systems and its implications for the evolution of gene expression , 2008, Molecular systems biology.

[31]  Santiago F. Elena,et al.  Virus Evolution: Insights from an Experimental Approach , 2007 .

[32]  D. Promislow,et al.  Direct Selection on Genetic Robustness Revealed in the Yeast Transcriptome , 2007, PloS one.

[33]  Yuseob Kim RATE OF ADAPTIVE PEAK SHIFTS WITH PARTIAL GENETIC ROBUSTNESS , 2007, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[34]  M. Huynen,et al.  Neutral evolution of mutational robustness. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  Charles E. Taylor,et al.  Artificial Life II , 1991 .