Evolution of Genome Size in Asexual Digital Organisms

Genome sizes have evolved to vary widely, from 250 bases in viroids to 670 billion bases in some amoebas. This remarkable variation in genome size is the outcome of complex interactions between various evolutionary factors such as mutation rate and population size. While comparative genomics has uncovered how some of these evolutionary factors influence genome size, we still do not understand what drives genome size evolution. Specifically, it is not clear how the primordial mutational processes of base substitutions, insertions, and deletions influence genome size evolution in asexual organisms. Here, we use digital evolution to investigate genome size evolution by tracking genome edits and their fitness effects in real time. In agreement with empirical data, we find that mutation rate is inversely correlated with genome size in asexual populations. We show that at low point mutation rate, insertions are significantly more beneficial than deletions, driving genome expansion and the acquisition of phenotypic complexity. Conversely, the high mutational load experienced at high mutation rates inhibits genome growth, forcing the genomes to compress their genetic information. Our analyses suggest that the inverse relationship between mutation rate and genome size is a result of the tradeoff between evolving phenotypic innovation and limiting the mutational load. Supplementary information The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/srep25786) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[1]  Theodore Garland,et al.  Did Genetic Drift Drive Increases in Genome Complexity? , 2010, PLoS Genetics.

[2]  Howard Ochman,et al.  The consequences of genetic drift for bacterial genome complexity. , 2009, Genome research.

[3]  J. Mattick,et al.  The relationship between non-protein-coding DNA and eukaryotic complexity. , 2007, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

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

[5]  R. S. Harris,et al.  Transient and heritable mutators in adaptive evolution in the lab and in nature. , 1998, Genetics.

[6]  R. Lenski,et al.  Diminishing returns from mutation supply rate in asexual populations. , 1999, Science.

[7]  Jody L. Miller,et al.  Get a life! , 2005, Fortune.

[8]  Philipp Kapranov,et al.  Pseudogenes in the ENCODE regions: consensus annotation, analysis of transcription, and evolution. , 2007, Genome research.

[9]  D. Petrov,et al.  Evidence for DNA loss as a determinant of genome size. , 2000, Science.

[10]  David Metzgar,et al.  Evidence for the Adaptive Evolution of Mutation Rates , 2000, Cell.

[11]  C. Adami Digital genetics: unravelling the genetic basis of evolution , 2006, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[12]  C. Adami,et al.  Evolution of Biological Complexity , 2000, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[13]  N. Moran,et al.  Extreme genome reduction in symbiotic bacteria , 2011, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[14]  P. Pandolfi,et al.  A coding-independent function of gene and pseudogene mRNAs regulates tumour biology , 2010, Nature.

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

[16]  Alexei J Drummond,et al.  Phylogenetic evidence for deleterious mutation load in RNA viruses and its contribution to viral evolution. , 2007, Molecular biology and evolution.

[17]  F. Taddei,et al.  Costs and Benefits of High Mutation Rates: Adaptive Evolution of Bacteria in the Mouse Gut , 2001, Science.

[18]  C. Ofria,et al.  Adaptive Radiation from Resource Competition in Digital Organisms , 2004, Science.

[19]  T. Gregory,et al.  Insertion-deletion biases and the evolution of genome size. , 2004, Gene.

[20]  M. Lynch Streamlining and simplification of microbial genome architecture. , 2006, Annual review of microbiology.

[21]  T. Gregory,et al.  The Case for Junk DNA , 2014, PLoS genetics.

[22]  S. Elena,et al.  Shrinkage of Genome Size in a Plant RNA Virus upon Transfer of an Essential Viral Gene into the Host Genome , 2014, Genome biology and evolution.

[23]  C. Titus Brown,et al.  Evolutionary Learning in the 2D Artificial Life System "Avida" , 1994, adap-org/9405003.

[24]  David M. Bryson,et al.  Coevolution Drives the Emergence of Complex Traits and Promotes Evolvability , 2014, PLoS biology.

[25]  T. Johnson,et al.  The evolution of mutation rates: separating causes from consequences , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

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

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

[28]  R. Sanjuán,et al.  Viral Mutation Rates , 2010, Journal of Virology.

[29]  J. Drake,et al.  Mutation rates among RNA viruses. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  Christoph Adami,et al.  Viral evolution under the pressure of an adaptive immune system: Optimal mutation rates for viral escape , 2002, Complex..

[31]  G. Beslon,et al.  Evolutionary coupling between the deleteriousness of gene mutations and the amount of non-coding sequences. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[32]  Robert T. Pennock Models, simulations, instantiations, and evidence: the case of digital evolution , 2007, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[33]  Edward C Holmes,et al.  Error thresholds and the constraints to RNA virus evolution , 2003, Trends in Microbiology.

[34]  Guillaume Beslon,et al.  Self-adaptation of Genome Size in Artificial Organisms , 2005, ECAL.

[35]  C. Adami,et al.  Differentially-Expressed Pseudogenes in HIV-1 Infection , 2015, Viruses.

[36]  R. Lenski,et al.  Microbial genetics: Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation , 2003, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[37]  Santiago F. Elena,et al.  Experimental Evolution of Pseudogenization and Gene Loss in a Plant RNA Virus , 2013, Molecular biology and evolution.

[38]  Axel Imhof,et al.  Dynamics of adaptive microevolution of hypermutable Pseudomonas aeruginosa during chronic pulmonary infection in patients with cystic fibrosis. , 2009, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[39]  A. Vinogradov Evolution of genome size: multilevel selection, mutation bias or dynamical chaos? , 2004, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[40]  G. Beslon,et al.  A long-term evolutionary pressure on the amount of noncoding DNA. , 2007, Molecular biology and evolution.

[41]  Robert T. Pennock,et al.  The evolutionary origin of complex features , 2003, Nature.

[42]  Rafael Sanjuán,et al.  The effect of genetic robustness on evolvability in digital organisms , 2008, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[43]  Christoph Endres,et al.  Introduction to Artificial Life , 2000, Künstliche Intell..

[44]  M. Lynch The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origins of organismal complexity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[45]  R. B. Azevedo,et al.  On the Immortality of Television Sets: “Function” in the Human Genome According to the Evolution-Free Gospel of ENCODE , 2013, Genome biology and evolution.

[46]  Santiago F. Elena,et al.  Adaptive Value of High Mutation Rates of RNA Viruses: Separating Causes from Consequences , 2005, Journal of Virology.

[47]  Aaron P. Wagner,et al.  The Roles of Standing Genetic Variation and Evolutionary History in Determining the Evolvability of Anti-Predator Strategies , 2014, bioRxiv.

[48]  Michael T. McManus,et al.  Pervasive Transcription of the Human Genome Produces Thousands of Previously Unidentified Long Intergenic Noncoding RNAs , 2013, PLoS genetics.

[49]  Charles Ofria,et al.  Natural Selection Fails to Optimize Mutation Rates for Long-Term Adaptation on Rugged Fitness Landscapes , 2008, ECAL.

[50]  D. Bartel,et al.  lincRNAs: Genomics, Evolution, and Mechanisms , 2013, Cell.

[51]  M. Lynch,et al.  The Origins of Genome Complexity , 2003, Science.

[52]  M. Lynch Evolution of the mutation rate. , 2010, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[53]  J. Drake A constant rate of spontaneous mutation in DNA-based microbes. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[54]  J. Mattick,et al.  The evolution of controlled multitasked gene networks: the role of introns and other noncoding RNAs in the development of complex organisms. , 2001, Molecular biology and evolution.

[55]  Guillaume Beslon,et al.  In silico experimental evolution: a tool to test evolutionary scenarios , 2013, BMC Bioinformatics.

[56]  Dmitri A Petrov,et al.  Mutational equilibrium model of genome size evolution. , 2002, Theoretical population biology.

[57]  Michael J. Wiser,et al.  Mutation rate dynamics in a bacterial population reflect tension between adaptation and genetic load , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[58]  Howard Ochman,et al.  Deletional Bias across the Three Domains of Life , 2009, Genome biology and evolution.

[59]  Liran Carmel,et al.  Origin and evolution of spliceosomal introns , 2012, Biology Direct.

[60]  The evolution of mutation rate in an antagonistic coevolutionary model with maternal transmission of parasites , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.