Properties of Biological Mutation Networks and Their Implications for ALife

We report a study of networks constructed from mutation patterns observed in biology. These networks form evolutionary trajectories, which allow for both frequent substitution of closely related structures, and a small evolutionary distance between any two structures. These two properties define the small-world phenomenon. The mutation behavior between tokens in an evolvable artificial chemistry determines its ability to explore evolutionary space. This concept is underrepresented in previous work on string-based chemistries. We argue that small-world mutation networks will confer better exploration of the evolutionary space than either random or fully regular mutation strategies. We calculate network statistics from two data sets: amino acid substitution matrices, and codon-level single point mutations. The first class are observed data from protein alignments; while the second class is defined by the standard genetic code that is used to translate RNA into amino acids. We report a methodology for creating small-world mutation networks for artificial chemistries with arbitrary node count and connectivity. We argue that ALife systems would benefit from this approach, as it delivers a more viable exploration of evolutionary space.

[1]  T. Prescott,et al.  The brainstem reticular formation is a small-world, not scale-free, network , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  W. Taylor,et al.  The classification of amino acid conservation. , 1986, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  Larry Yaeger,et al.  Evolutionary Selection of Network Structure and Function , 2010, ALIFE.

[4]  Shmuel Pietrokovski,et al.  The Blocks database--a system for protein classification , 1996, Nucleic Acids Res..

[5]  V. Latora,et al.  Harmony in the Small-World , 2000, cond-mat/0008357.

[6]  Sean R Eddy,et al.  Where did the BLOSUM62 alignment score matrix come from? , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Susan Stepney,et al.  Diversity from a Monoculture - Effects of Mutation-on-Copy in a String-Based Artificial Chemistry , 2010, ALIFE.

[8]  J. Clune,et al.  Natural Selection Fails to Optimize Mutation Rates for Long-Term Adaptation on Rugged Fitness Landscapes , 2008, PLoS computational biology.

[9]  L. Hurst,et al.  The Genetic Code Is One in a Million , 1998, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[10]  Susan Stepney,et al.  Specification of the Stringmol chemical programming language version 0 . 2 Technical Report Number YCS-2010-458 , 2010 .

[11]  Kyubum Wee,et al.  Construction of Hypercycles in Typogenetics with Evolutionary Algorithms , 2007, ECAL.

[12]  R. Russell,et al.  Amino‐Acid Properties and Consequences of Substitutions , 2003 .

[13]  M. O. Dayhoff,et al.  22 A Model of Evolutionary Change in Proteins , 1978 .

[14]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[15]  Wojciech Piaseczny,et al.  Chemical Genetic AlgorithmsEvolutionary Optimization of Binary-to-Real-Value Translation in Genetic Algorithms , 2006, Artificial Life.

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

[17]  Claus O. Wilke,et al.  Evolution of Resource Competition between Mutually Dependent Digital Organisms , 2004, Artificial Life.

[18]  S. Osawa,et al.  Recent evidence for evolution of the genetic code , 1992, Microbiological reviews.

[19]  Thomas S. Ray,et al.  Evolution, complexity, entropy and artificial reality , 1994 .

[20]  T H Jukes,et al.  Evolutionary changes in the genetic code , 1990, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  M. O. Dayhoff A model of evolutionary change in protein , 1978 .

[22]  Mikhail Prokopenko,et al.  Complex Networks , 2011, Artificial Life.

[23]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.